scholarly journals Preface

2022 ◽  
Vol 2148 (1) ◽  
pp. 011001
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Applied Physics ◽  
International Conference ◽  
Engineering Mathematics ◽  
The People ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Generous Support ◽  
Review Reports

The Program Committee warmly welcomes all our distinguished delegates and guests to attend the 2021 2nd International Conference on Physics and Engineering Mathematics (ICPEM 2021), the Online International Conference to be held on November 13th-14th, 2021. ICPEM is an annual event that focuses on the various state-of-the-art advances and innovations in Applied Physics and Engineering Mathematics. It aims to provide a forum for researchers, engineers and academicians to exchange new ideas and application experiences, establish business or research relations and find global partners for future collaboration in the fields of Physics and Engineering Mathematics. The ICPEM 2021 conference received around 141 submissions from all over the world; all submissions went through a rigorous peer review process where each submitted paper was reviewed by at least two experts from the area. Based on the review reports, 69 papers were selected for oral presentation in the conference and included in the Proceedings of 2021 2nd International Conference on Physics and Engineering Mathematics. On behalf of the Program Committee of the 2021 2nd International Conference on Physics and Engineering Mathematics, we would like to thank all the people who have contributed to the conference this year. In particular, we would like to thank all referees for their review work. We would like to thank the keynote speakers and session chairs for spending their valuable time to support the conference. We also would like to thank all the authors for contributing their papers to the conference. Finally, we are particularly grateful to all the organizers and sponsoring institutions for the generous support they have offered to this conference. We hope and believe that every participant will enjoy the academic atmosphere brought by the contributors of the conference. We look forward to a more successful conference next year. The Organizing Committee of ICPEM2021

scholarly journals Preface: 3rd International Conference on Innovations in Economic Management and Social Science (IEMSS 2021)

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. I
Author(s):  
Shenliang Qian ◽  
Joyce Springhall
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Economic Management ◽  
Research Results ◽  
International Conference ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Conference Committee

The organizing committee of IEMSS 2021 is proud to present the proceedings of the 2021 3rd International Conference on Innovations in Economic Management and Social Science, held in Hohhot, China during November 27-28, 2021.   IEMSS 2021 aims to bring together researchers, scientists, engineers, and scholar students to exchange and share their experience, new ideas, and research results about all aspects of innovations in economic management and social science, and discuss the practical challenges encountered and the solutions adopted.   IEMSS 2021 received more than 50 manuscripts, and less than 40 submissions have been accepted by our reviewers. By submitting a paper to IEMSS 2021, the authors agreed to the review process and understood that papers would undergo a peer-review process. Manuscripts were reviewed by appropriately qualified experts in the field selected by the conference committee, who took detailed comments and-if the submission was accepted-the authors would submit a revised version that took into account this feedback.   Hopefully, all participants and other interested readers will benefit scientifically from the proceedings and also find it stimulating in the process.   With warmest regards,   IEMSS Conference Organizing Committees Hohhot, China

scholarly journals Peering into peer review: Good quality reviews of research articles require neither writing too much nor taking too long

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula CABEZAS Del FIERRO ◽  
Omar SABAJ MERUANE ◽  
Germán VARAS ESPINOZA ◽  
Valeria GONZÁLEZ HERRERA
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Average Length ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Review Time ◽  
Feedback Quality ◽  
Review Reports ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract The value of scientific knowledge is highly dependent on the quality of the process used to produce it, namely, the quality of the peer-review process. This process is a pivotal part of science as it works both to legitimize and improve the work of the scientific community. In this context, the present study investigated the relationship between review time, length, and feedback quality of review reports in the peer-review process of research articles. For this purpose, the review time of 313 referee reports from three Chilean international journals were recorded. Feedback quality was determined estimating the rate of direct requests by the total number of comments in each report. Number of words was used to describe the average length in the sample. Results showed that average time and length have little variation across review reports, irrespective of their quality. Low quality reports tended to take longer to reach the editor, so neither time nor length were related to feedback quality. This suggests that referees mostly describe, criticize, or praise the content of the article instead of making useful and direct comments to help authors improve their manuscripts.

scholarly journals International Conference on Creative and Innovative Technology Education 2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Norah MD Noor
Keyword(s):  
Technology Education ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
High Standard ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Innovative Technology ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
International Conference ◽  
Or Practice ◽  
Quality Of Presentation

It is my great pleasure to present to you this special issue containing selected extended papers originally presented at the International Conference on Creative and Innovative Technology Education 2018 (iCITE2018), which took place in Johor Bahru, Malaysia from July 24 to July 25, 2018. iCITE2018 received 176 abstracts. 141 Authors of accepted abstracts were invited to submit full papers. Full papers were refereed by a double-blind reviewing process. Each paper was reviewed by 2 program committee members’ experts in the relevant field ensuring the publication of top-quality contributions. The peer review process was based on the following criteria: relevance to conference themes, quality of the content, significance for theory or practice, quality of presentation or standard of writing and originality. The final programme consists of 67 contributions were presented at the conference. Of those, 10 have been accepted to be included in this issue. I would like to thank all publication committee and reviewers for their hard work and for meeting the deadlines. In most cases there has been enough time for a round or two of revisions, I am confident, therefore, that the published papers have achieved high standard in terms of both technical content and the quality of presentation.

scholarly journals Open Peer Review in Scientific Publishing: A Web Mining Study of PeerJ Authors and Reviewers

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 60-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peiling Wang ◽  
Sukjin You ◽  
Rath Manasa ◽  
Dietmar Wolfram
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Web Mining ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Current Characteristics ◽  
Review Reports ◽  
Analytical Tools

AbstractPurposeTo understand how authors and reviewers are accepting and embracing Open Peer Review (OPR), one of the newest innovations in the Open Science movement.Design/methodology/approachThis research collected and analyzed data from the Open Access journal PeerJ over its first three years (2013–2016). Web data were scraped, cleaned, and structured using several Web tools and programs. The structured data were imported into a relational database. Data analyses were conducted using analytical tools as well as programs developed by the researchers.FindingsPeerJ, which supports optional OPR, has a broad international representation of authors and referees. Approximately 73.89% of articles provide full review histories. Of the articles with published review histories, 17.61% had identities of all reviewers and 52.57% had at least one signed reviewer. In total, 43.23% of all reviews were signed. The observed proportions of signed reviews have been relatively stable over the period since the Journal’s inception.Research limitationsThis research is constrained by the availability of the peer review history data. Some peer reviews were not available when the authors opted out of publishing their review histories. The anonymity of reviewers made it impossible to give an accurate count of reviewers who contributed to the review process.Practical implicationsThese findings shed light on the current characteristics of OPR. Given the policy that authors are encouraged to make their articles’ review history public and referees are encouraged to sign their review reports, the three years of PeerJ review data demonstrate that there is still some reluctance by authors to make their reviews public and by reviewers to identify themselves.Originality/valueThis is the first study to closely examine PeerJ as an example of an OPR model journal. As Open Science moves further towards open research, OPR is a final and critical component. Research in this area must identify the best policies and paths towards a transparent and open peer review process for scientific communication.

scholarly journals International Conference on Civil and Environmental Engineering (CENVIRON2021)

2021 ◽  
Vol 920 (1) ◽  
pp. 011001
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Committee Member ◽  
Green Technology ◽  
Environmental Engineering ◽  
Director General ◽  
Related Field ◽  
International Conference ◽  
Opening Ceremony ◽  
Virtual Conference

9 December 2021 (Online conference) Editors: Zul-Atfi Ismail, Fahmi Muhammad Ridwan, Che Zulzikrami Azner Abidin, Nur Soleha Abdul Rahim, Noor Ainee Zainol, Nurfadzillah Ishak Organiser: Faculty of Civil Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Perlis, Malaysia PREFACE International Conference on Civil and Environmental Engineering (CENVIRON2021) is the fourth CENVIRON conducted since the first conference in 2017. The initial purpose of the conference is to gather researchers, academia and industries in a platform to exchange views, share ideas and discuss current researches in the field of civil and environmental engineering. This include current research and development especially in the advancement of various scope related fundamentals and applications. This conference is expected to spur a fruitful debate and discussion, scientifically bring fresh ideas and at the same time, create a networking opportunity and strong collaboration between the participants. Due to the COVID 19 pandemic, unfortunately, we have reached an agreement to opt for a virtual conference instead of the planned physical conference in the metropolitan city of Penang, Malaysia. Since the pandemic in Malaysia is still unstable and shows no sign of settling soon, and no mass gathering is allowed, this would be the best choice as to put everyone’s health a priority. Despite that, our team has managed to meet regularly via face to face discussions and virtual meetings, in order to ensure the quality of the conference and manuscript is not compromised. The conference was officiated on 9th December 2021 by the UniMAP’s Vice Chancellor, Prof. Dr. Zaliman Sauli at Auditorium of UniMAP Chancellory Building with minimal physical attendees among the conference organizing committee member to allow for social distancing, and with more than 60 attendees following through Google meet platform. The opening ceremony was broadcasted live via UniMAP’s official Facebook page. Two esteemed keynote speakers were invited for the plenary sessions, i.e., Dato’ Seri Ir. Dr. Zaini Ujang (Secretary General, Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water Malaysia) and the Dato’ Ir. Haji Mohamad Zulkefly Sulaiman (Director General, Public Work Department Malaysia). The online parallel sessions were successfully organised at Tuanku Syed Faizuddin Putra Library, Universiti Malaysia Perlis (UniMAP) using Google Meet platform. Researchers, academicians and students are among the viewers of the virtual conference. The parallel sessions were conducted according to the theme of publication. Details of the presentation schedule were included in the upcoming section. Each parallel session was chaired by an academician in the related field of Civil and Environmental Engineering to ensure smooth and lively discussions. Each session took about 15 minutes of presentation and 5 minutes of Q&A. Overall, 70 papers were accepted for CENVIRON2021 after rigorous peer review process. In summary, the success of the conference is a team effort. I am grateful to all the committee members who worked very hard to make this event a successful one. We would also like to thank all the authors who submitted their papers to the conference, and the reviewers who contributed to the review process, ensuring quality publication of the conference proceedings. We hope that you will find this conference thought provoking and engrossing and that you had a valuable experience sharing ideas with others at this conference. On behalf of the Organizing Committee, Ir. Dr. Mohd Zulham Affandi Mohd Zahid, CENVIRON2021 Chairman List of Keynote Speakers are available in this pdf.

scholarly journals 2nd International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Energy Advancements (ICCIEA-2021), September 11-12, 2021 Virtual Format

2021 ◽  
Vol 2062 (1) ◽  
pp. 011001
Author(s):  
Nishu Gupta ◽  
Parvesh Kumar ◽  
H. S. Pali
Keyword(s):  
Computational Intelligence ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Steering Committee ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Technical Program ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Editorial Committee ◽  
International Conference ◽  
Sustainable Technologies ◽  
The World

International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Energy Advancements (ICCIEA-2021) is a prestigious event organized with a motivation to provide an excellent platform for the academicians, researchers, engineers, industrial participants and budding students around the world to share their research findings with the global experts. The conference aimed to provide researchers and attendees with prospects for global collaboration and networking among universities and corporate organizations for promoting research. ICCIEA-2021 was conducted in virtual format owing to the pandemic situation during 11th to 12th September 2021. It involved all classes of academia having research orientation. The conference was organized jointly by departments of ECE and ME, Vaagdevi College of Engineering and King Abdulaziz University, Rabigh, Saudi Arabia. As it was an event conducted in cyber form, the presentations were delivered using an online platform. Five different and parallel technical sessions were scheduled based upon the tracks of the articles and a Best Paper was awarded in each session. A total of 38 articles were selected for presentation after double blind peer review process. This proceeding issue compiles oral presentations that were presented by the authors and rigorously reviewed by a special committee designated by the editor team of the conference. The organizing and editorial committee of the ICCIEA-2021 hopes you enjoy reading the articles published in this volume of the JPCS. Besides, we wish to thank all the authors and participants for providing their valuable contributions for this proceeding as well as the reviewers for their constructive recommendations and criticism aiding to improve the presented articles. We are confident that this issue will serve as a reference for computational intelligence, industrial automation, energy advancements and sustainable technologies in the world of scientific research, engineering and technology. List of Organizing Committee, Steering Committee, Technical Program Committee, Industry Experts Committee, Editorial Committee, Invited Speakers, Organizing Institutions, Academic Partner are available in this pdf.

Shadow Program Committee Initiative

2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 16-18
Author(s):  
Patanamon Thongtanunam ◽  
Ayushi Rastogi ◽  
Foutse Khomh ◽  
Serge Demeyer ◽  
Meiyappan Nagappan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Early Career ◽  
New Faculty ◽  
Great Chance ◽  
Good Review ◽  
Initiative Program

The Shadow Program Committee (PC) is an initiative/program that provides an opportunity to Early-Career Researchers (ECRs), i.e., PhD students, postdocs, new faculty members, and industry practitioners, who have not been in a PC, to learn rst-hand about the peer-review process of the technical track at Software Engi- neering (SE) conferences. This program aims to train the next generation of PC members as well as to allow ECRs to be recog- nized and embedded in the research community. By participating in this program, ECRs will have a great chance i) to gain expe- rience about the reviewing process including the restrictions and ethical standards of the academic peer-review process; ii) to be mentored by senior researchers on how to write a good review; and iii) to create a network with other ECRs and senior researchers (i.e., Shadow PC advisors). The Shadow PC program was rst introduced to the SE research community at the Mining Software Repositories (MSR) confer- ence in 2021. The program was led by Patanamon Thongta- nunam and Ayushi Rastogi (Shadow PC Co-chairs) with support from Shadow PC Advisor Co-Chairs (Foutse Khomh and Serge Demeyer), PC Co-Chairs of the technical track (Meiyappan Na- gappan and Kelly Blincoe), and the General Chair of the con- ference, Gregorio Robles. To promote and facilitate the Shadow PC program at SE conferences in the future, this report provides details about the process and a re ection on the Shadow PC pro- gram during MSR2021. The presentation slides and video are also available online at https://youtu.be/ReUXwmtIEk8.

scholarly journals A retrospective study investigating requests for self-citation during open peer review in a general medicine journal

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Peebles ◽  
Marissa Scandlyn ◽  
Blair R. Hesp
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
General Medicine ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Medicine Journal ◽  
Objective Feedback ◽  
Review Reports

AbstractIntroductionPeer review is a volunteer process for improving the quality of publications by providing objective feedback to authors, but also presents an opportunity for reviewers to seek personal reward by requesting self-citations. Open peer review may reduce the prevalence of self-citation requests and encourage author rebuttal over accession. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of self-citation requests and their inclusion in manuscripts in a journal with open peer review.MethodsRequests for additional references to be included during peer review for articles published between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018 in BMC Medicine were evaluated. Data extracted included total number of self-citations requested, self-citations that were included in the final published manuscript and manuscripts that included at least one self-citation, and compared with corresponding data on independent citations.ResultsIn total, 932 peer review reports from 373 manuscripts were analysed. At least one additional citation was requested in 25.9% (n=241) of reports. Self-citation requests were included in 44.4% of reports requesting additional citations (11.5% of all reports). Requests for self-citation were significantly more likely than independent citations to be incorporated in the published manuscript (65.1% vs 52.1%; chi-square p=0.003). At the manuscript level, when requested, self-citations were incorporated in 76.6% of manuscripts (n=72; 19.3% of all manuscripts) compared with 68.5% of manuscripts with independent citation requests (n=102; 27.3% of manuscripts). A significant interaction was observed between the presence of self-citation requests and the likelihood of any citation request being incorporated (100% incorporation in manuscripts with self-citation requests alone versus 62.7–72.2% with any independent citation request; Fisher’s exact test p<0.0005).ConclusionsRequests for self-citations during the peer review process are common. The transparency of open peer review may have the unexpected effect of encouraging authors to incorporate self-citation requests by disclosing peer reviewer identity.

scholarly journals PIA19+MRSS19 &#8211; PHOTOGRAMMETRIC IMAGE ANALYSIS 2019 & MUNICH REMOTE SENSING SYMPOSIUM 2019: PREFACE

2019 ◽  
Vol IV-2/W7 ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
U. Stilla
Keyword(s):  
Remote Sensing ◽  
Image Analysis ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Spatial Information ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Full Paper ◽  
Common Event ◽  
Remote Sensing Symposium

Abstract. Automated extraction of objects from remotely sensed data is an important topic of research in Computer Vision, Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing, and Geoinformation Science. In order to discuss recent developments and future trends in research in automatic object extraction and their influence on sensors and processing techniques, the well-known ISPRS workshop "Photogrammetric Image Analysis" (PIA) and the "Munich Remote Sensing Symposium" (MRSS) are held as a common event for the first time.While in the past PIA specialised on the automatic exploitation of the image content, MRSS focuses on the geometric processing of aerial and in particular of space imagery. Realising that both areas - geometry and semantics - can significantly support each other when considered together in exploitation of images and point clouds, the two events, organised under a common roof, are held at Technische Universität München (TUM) in September 2019. At the same time, they keep their identity, as the meeting is organised as two parallel workshops with common plenary sessions and common proceedings.The aim of the common event is to seek, exploit and deepen the synergies between geometry and semantics, and to give the two scientific communities the possibility to discuss with and to learn from each other. Oral sessions with time slots of 25 min give space of 5 min for discussion of each presentation. Particular attention is also given to the poster sessions, which are supported by short oral presentations of the presenter before. The joint event addresses experts from research, government, and private industry. It consists of high quality papers, and provides an international forum for discussion of leading research and technological developments as well as applications in the field. It is worth mentioning that the ISPRS Foundation, Inc. (TIF) supports the event by providing six travel grants to qualified individuals especially from developing countries and regions.Prospective authors were invited to submit either full papers or abstracts. In total, we received 114 contributions from 28 countries.Full papers (max. eight pages) underwent a rigorous double blind peer review process. We received 48 full papers for review. Most papers were reviewed by three members of the program committee, 16 papers were reviewed by four members of the program committee. In total we received 157 full paper reviews from 35 reviewers. The maximum number of full papers per reviewer was eight. Altogether 31 papers were accepted based on the reviews for publication in the “ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences” which correspond to an acceptance rate of 65%. The fact that the full papers were peer reviewed is mentioned on each paper.Papers not passing the full paper peer review process were considered in the following abstract review process. In total 83 contributions were reviewed for publication in “The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences”. Finally 42 final papers (51%) were considered for publication.

scholarly journals Publishing peer review materials

F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 1655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Beck ◽  
Kathryn Funk ◽  
Melissa Harrison ◽  
Jo McEntyre ◽  
Josie Breen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Data Models ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Review Reports

Publishing peer review materials alongside research articles promises to make the peer review process more transparent as well as making it easier to recognise these contributions and give credit to peer reviewers. Traditionally, the peer review reports, editors letters and author responses are only shared between the small number of people in those roles prior to publication, but there is a growing interest in making some or all of these materials available. A small number of journals have been publishing peer review materials for some time, others have begun this practice more recently, and significantly more are now considering how they might begin. This article outlines the outcomes from a recent workshop among journals with experience in publishing peer review materials, in which the specific operation of these workflows, and the challenges, were discussed. Here, we provide a draft as to how to represent these materials in the JATS and Crossref data models to facilitate the coordination and discoverability of peer review materials, and seek feedback on these initial recommendations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document