ethics & policies

 • The authors are requested to submit their original and unpublished work as full paper for the publication.

• The submitted work to any other journal or conference proceedings are not allowed.

• The plagiarism ratio should not exceed 10 %, otherwise it will not consider to further process.

• The authors are also instructed to prepare their manuscript as per given template otherwise it will not be considered to avoid the publication.

• Please ensure that the conference paper should not be less than 6 pages and should not exceed 10 pages in length. NOTE: *In case of additional pages, additional charges have to be paid by the participant. 

• Please ensure for all the figures and equations citations and sources are provided, for original work, please leave a remark that this is an original work.

• Incomplete manuscripts cannot be accepted; we will only proceed when the complete manuscript is available.

• To produce your proceedings, we will need source file in MS word.

• The images must be of high resolution at least 300 dpi.

• The tables must not be in image format.

• Each submitted papers are anonymized by removing author names and affiliations.

• The editor of conference proceedings will assign each paper to several reviewers as per their expertise.

• Reviewers assess each paper independently based on quality of work, originality, significance, clarity, and contribution to the field.

• Based on the reviews, the Conference Proceeding’s Editors make decision on each paper (Common decisions include acceptance, revisions, or rejection).

• Authors are notified of the decision along with the reviewers' comments. For accepted papers with revisions, authors typically have a deadline to submit a revised version, which may undergo a final check before acceptance.

• In double-blind review process, we will ensure that submissions are evaluated fairly and impartially based on the merit of their content, without bias towards author identity or affiliation. This systematic approach helps us maintain the quality and integrity of academic conferences by selecting papers that contribute significantly to the field and meet the expectations of the conference attendees and organizers.

Reviewers typically address the following questions to make a decision:

1. Is the paper suitable for this publication?

2. Has the author followed the guidelines?

3. Is the research ethically conducted?

4. Is there a significant contribution? 

For a conference paper to be accepted it must generally meet the following criteria:

• Significant Contribution: The paper must offer a substantial contribution to the existing literature.

• Relevance to Theme: The content must fit within the specific aims and scope of the conference and the publishing outlet.

• Scientific Soundness & Rigor: The research must be academically sound, with accurate data, robust methodology, and valid conclusions supported by the data.

• Originality: The work must be original, presenting new research or significant developments, rather than a mere recap of existing data.

• Ethical Compliance: The study must adhere to international and local ethical guidelines, including proper consent to publish, and declaration of any competing interests.

• Quality Presentation: The manuscript must be clearly written, well-structured, and formatted according to T&F guidelines.

• Proper Citation: Relevant, timely, and verified literature must be cited, avoiding excessive self-citation. 

Common reasons for the rejection of conference papers, often identified during the initial screening or peer review, include: 

• Out of Scope: The topic does not align with the conference theme or the publisher's guidelines.

• Poor Quality/Language: Low-quality English, difficult-to-follow logic, or poor presentation (e.g., in figures/tables).

• Methodological Flaws: Incomplete data, too small a sample size, or inappropriate statistical analysis.

• Ethical Misconduct: Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism), fabricated/manipulated data, image manipulation, or failure to obtain proper ethical approvals.

• Improper Structure: Lack of proper structure (e.g., missing abstract, improper formatting) or exceeding page/word limits.

• Low Impact/Originality: The paper does not offer a new or significant contribution.

• Citation Manipulation: Excessive or inappropriate citation of specific authors or papers.

• AI Misuse: Excessive use of AI-generated content without proper disclosure (limit usually 20% max, with disclosure required).