Review

At the International Conference on Intelligent Networking, Computing, and Data Science (ICINCDS), we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic quality through a meticulous review process.

1.Initial Screening:

To ensure that all submissions meet basic academic and administrative requirements before entering the formal review stage.

• Plagiarism Check: All submitted papers are run through advanced plagiarism detection software. A similarity index of less than 20% is mandatory. Higher similarities may lead to immediate desk rejection.
• Formatting Compliance: Papers must confirm to the specified conference paper template, including font styles, margins, citation styles, and section formatting.
• Scope Relevance: Submissions must align with one or more of the core areas of the conference: intelligent networking, computing, data science, and related interdisciplinary topics. Off-topic papers are rejected early to maintain focus and relevance.

2. Peer Review:

To provide a thorough, fair, and balanced academic evaluation from multiple expert perspectives.

• Reviewer Assignment: Each paper is assigned to three qualified reviewers who have domain expertise closely related to the paper’s topic.
• Double-Blind System: Both author and reviewer identities are anonymized to eliminate bias based on affiliation, seniority, or geography.
• Review Timeline: Reviewers are given a set period (usually 3–4 weeks) to read and evaluate the submission.
• Review Components: Each reviewer provides scores, detailed comments, and recommendations (accept, minor/major revision, reject).

3. Evaluation Criteria:

To assess the academic quality and contribution of each paper using standardized benchmarks.

• Originality: Is the work novel? Does it present new ideas, methods, or findings?
• Technical Depth: Does the paper demonstrate a sound understanding of the subject with sufficient depth and rigor?
• Clarity and Presentation: Is the writing clear, well-structured, and logically organized? Are visuals (figures/tables) well-integrated?
• Relevance: How well does the paper fit the themes of ICINCDS?
• Contribution to Research or Practice: Does the paper advance the field or provide valuable insights for practitioners?

4.Revision & Resubmission:

To give authors a fair chance to improve their work based on expert feedback.

• Revision Invitation: Authors of papers that show promise but need improvement are invited to revise and resubmit within a specified timeframe.
• Response to Reviewers: Authors must submit a detailed response letter explaining how they addressed each reviewer comment.
• Second Round Review: Revised papers may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers or new ones, depending on the extent of changes.

5.Final Selection:

To ensure only the most suitable papers are accepted for the conference program and proceedings.

• Program Committee Deliberation: The committee reviews all scores, comments, and revision outcomes to make the final decision.
• Balance and Diversity: In addition to quality, the committee may consider topic diversity and balance across tracks and sessions.
• Acceptance Notification: Authors are informed of the final decision along with any final formatting or technical corrections required.

6. Camera-Ready Submission

To prepare papers for official publication and indexing.

• Final Formatting: Accepted papers must be revised to match the publisher’s camera-ready guidelines (usually IEEE, Springer, or ACM formats).
• Copyright and Metadata: Authors must submit copyright forms and verify metadata for indexing in digital libraries.
• Deadline Compliance: Strict deadlines are enforced to ensure timely inclusion in the conference proceedings and digital archives.

Only high-quality, original research will be selected for presentation and publication.