Submission, Refereeing and Acceptance of Papers
The process of refereeing and publishing is a cumulative one that allows for continuous improvement of each paper, especially in reflecting discussions at the conference.
Papers will be accepted in the first instance by blind refereeing of 400 word draft extended abstracts (due Friday 31 May). Revised extended abstracts are due on Friday 28 June. This gives authors a chance to rework abstracts, benefiting from criticisms offered. Papers must be connected to the conference theme and (working) sub-themes.
Accepted draft extended abstracts will be posted on the conference website for open refereeing by conference participants. All comments and responses will be visible to all conference attendees (but not to the public). This is the second level of refereeing.
Paper presentation consists of listening to and including benefits from comments, encouragements and criticisms made at the conference, as well as incorporating new material found by authors as a result of their participation. (Publication details to be announced before or at the conference.)
After the conference, authors will be invited to rework their papers. Reworked papers will be subject to rigorous, traditional blind peer review processes, after the conference.
Post-Conference Refereeing Schedule
| Sun 13-Oct-13 | Register wish to submit paper at proceedings.asc.2013@gmail.com. |
| Sun 01-Dec-13 | Final draft of paper submitted. |
| Sun 15-Dec-13 | Papers sent to reviewers. |
| Sun 05-Jan-14 | Reviews returned. |
| Sun 19-Jan-14 | Reviews and reconcilliations sent to authors. |
| Sun 23-Feb-14 | Modified papers resubmitted. |
| Sun 09-Mar-14 | Modified papers resent to reviewers for checking. |
| Sun 30-Mar-14 | Reviewers’ comments returned. |
| Sun 27-Apr-14 | Tidy up. Complete ancilliary material (e.g. introduction). Proceedings sent to publishers. |
This schedule allows some extra time by shortening times allowed for stages in case of delay.
Abstract Refereeing Panel
The refereeing panel for the initial abstracts will be composed of members of the conference Program Committee, who will, when they feel it necessary, elicit help from the International Advisory Board.
The revised papers will be double blind refereed by conference participants and other qualified referees. We have found this to be a constructive and rigorous process that guarantees a high quality of work.
Paper Refereeing Process
We assume that papers will derive from the conference. We expect papers that have been submitted as abstracts for consideration at the conference to be extensively reworked, as well as new papers to be offered as a result of conference attendance.
We have in recent years established a very thorough refereeing process. This involves double blind reviewing. Reviews are then subjected to a process of reconciliation by the editors, and reviews and reconciliation are sent to authors for action. Amended papers are resubmitted to the same reviewers to check that there is a satisfactory response, and again these reviews and any needed reconciliation are sent to authors. This results in work of high standard.
We understand reviews as both judgmental and tutorial. We do not require that all review comments are followed. We do expect that authors provide cogent and convincing arguments why they do not act on comments
We assume that all conferees are available to act as reviewers for papers unless they specifically withdraw.
Limitations on Papers
Paper proposals must address, as a central concern, the conference theme. Proposals that do not explicitly address the conference theme will not be accepted.
Paper formatting will satisfy the requirements of Kybernetes, in which the proceedings will be published.
The limits of 3000 words and up to 8 black and white diagrams will be strictly imposed and papers that are outside this specification will not generally be considered for publication. Exceptions may, exceptionally, be made, by prior consultation with the proceedings editors (Ranulph Glanville and Dai Griffiths).
Most Discussed