Paper Review

Statements of Originality

  • Hereon, IASED reiterates that the conference firmly resists the plagiarism, self-plagiarism. Any act of plagiarism is unacceptable, which are considered as a serious breach of professional conduct, with potentially severe ethical and legal consequences. Before submission, you are suggested to make a cross check to ensure that your manuscript similarity will be below 30% (better less than 20%). Meanwhile, please make sure that the similar contents are properly reused basing on your checking report. Plagiarism is commonly defined as “the use of others prior ideas, processes, results, or words without explicitly acknowledging the original author and source”. 


All regular papers will go through two parts of reviews, including preliminary review and double-blind peer review.

The Preliminary Review

  • The papers will be checked in terms of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, paper length, structure, research topics and language etc. The paper can be sent to double-blind peer review only if the paper passed the preliminary review. Generally speaking, the preliminary review feedback is available in 3 working days.


The Double-Blind Peer Review

  • The authors' names, affiliations, acknowledgments and other related personal information will be deleted or covered before the papers are sent to double-blind peer review.

  • The papers will be reviewed by at least two reviewers, but usually by three or more to review the papers’ relevance, originality, technical quality, significance and presentation.

  • Each reviewer will be assigned to not exceed 3 papers and given 2-4 weeks for one paper reviewing.

  • The reviewer should account for their reviewing decision by providing the sufficient, substantial and well-founded comments that may help the authors to optimize the paper. In addition, the reviewer is also probably asked to answer a series of questions by program committee. After receiving the review comments, the authors are entitled to the rebuttal and its’ feedback. But the final review decision will not be changed in virtue of that.
http://www.meamt.org/review
www.meamt.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-04
14408
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:Z6XQEF4FOIJQTXI7OEIYHJZ5CFE6Y7U7
<urn:uuid:b12927b4-0bbc-436d-b8ca-8180ce9617a3>
2021-01-21T00:57:20Z
47.244.103.218
text/html
sha1:PQQYZJOEDUI4WAG53MS2GP5OQMF4JCHH
<urn:uuid:f085e2cc-e090-4095-9285-8925744db922>
http://www.meamt.org/review
response
<urn:uuid:80d3c208-850a-4d0d-a2f7-45164cff0ceb>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-04
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for January 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-172.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.17 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/