Follow Us
Follow Us

Instructions to Reviewers

Home Instructions to Reviewers

Conference Reviewer Guidelines

These guidelines are intended to support a fair, rigorous, and constructive peer-review process. Reviewers are encouraged to evaluate each submission based on its originality, scientific quality, methodological rigor, and contribution to the research community.

01
Assess Novelty

Is the contribution genuinely new and clearly distinguished from prior work?

02
Verify Technical Soundness

Are the methods, assumptions, and conclusions scientifically valid?

03
Evaluate Experimental Rigor

Are the results supported by appropriate datasets, strong baselines, and fair evaluation?

04
Check Reproducibility

Are sufficient implementation and experimental details provided?

05
Review Citations Critically

Are references relevant and balanced, without excessive self-citation or citation padding?

06
Measure Significance

Does the work provide meaningful scientific or practical impact?

07
Examine Research Integrity

Look for data leakage, unsupported claims, unrealistic results, or methodological flaws.

08
Consider Presentation Quality

Is the paper clear, organized, and easy to follow?

09
Focus on Substance, Not Style

Good writing, low similarity scores, or AI buzzwords do not substitute for strong research.

10
Ask the Key Question

Does this paper provide enough novelty, rigor, and impact to justify publication?

Final Acceptance Test

Before recommending acceptance, a reviewer should be able to answer Yes to all of the following questions:

  • 01 Is it novel?
  • 02 Is it technically sound?
  • 03 Is it well validated?
  • 04 Is it reproducible?
  • 05 Is it significant to the community?
Important Note

If any answer is No, the concern should be clearly documented in the review.