Paper Preparation & Submission
Types of Contributions
- Full Paper (min. 8 – max.10 pages)
- Work in Progress, Poster (min. 6 max. 8 pages)
- Workshops, Tutorials
All submissions are subject to a double-blind peer-reviewing process.
What to submit?
Abstract Submission template
- Title (Bold, justified, 14pt Times New Roman font, 0pt space before, 12pt space after)
- Name of submitting author (Regular, justified, 12pt Times New Roman font, 0pt space before, 0pt space after)
- with affiliation (Italics, justified, 11pt Times New Roman font, 0pt space before, 0pt space after)
- and email address (Italics, justified, 11pt Times New Roman font, 0pt space before, 0pt space after)
- Names of co-authors and their affiliations (same format with submitting author)
- A short abstract of 250 words for inclusion in the conference program and book of abstracts. (Regular, justified, 11pt Times New Roman font, 0pt space before, 0pt space after)
- 4 to 6 Key-words (Bold, justified, 11pt Times New Roman font, 0pt space before, 6pt space after)
If you have any questions concerning the preparation of your presentation please contact us via email: firstname.lastname@example.org
|March, 4th 2018||Extened submission deadline of structured 250 words abstracts|
|March, 7th 2018||Notification of acceptance for abstracts|
|April , 2nd 2018||Publication of the Program|
|November, 1st 2018||Submission of papers for the Publications on MENON after peer review process|
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
- All submitted papers are subject to double-blind review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the paper.
- The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, significance, originality, readability and language.
- The possible decisions include acceptance or rejection.
- Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
- Articles may be rejected without review if they are obviously not suitable for publication.
- The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
- The reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
- The staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
- Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents and are reviewed by anonymous staff.
- A reviewer should also call to the publisher’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
- A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
- The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
- Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publication concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
- Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported work.
- All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.