Review Process — ICEEA-2026 & ICETS-2026

Transparent, fair and rigorous peer review to ensure high scientific standards and integrity.

Publication Tracks: Springer Book & Scopus Journal

Overview

All full papers submitted to ICEEA-2026/ICETS-2026 will be evaluated through a multi-stage peer-review workflow. The process is designed to be objective, constructive and timely. Final publication decisions are based exclusively on reviewer recommendations.

Review Stages

  1. Initial Screening — Administrative and scope check for originality, completeness, and adherence to submission guidelines.
  2. Assignment to Reviewers — Each manuscript is assigned to at least two independent experts with relevant subject-matter expertise.
  3. Peer Review — Reviewers assess the manuscript using a standard rubric (novelty, methodology, clarity, significance, reproducibility, references).
  4. Editorial Decision — Based on reviewer reports, the Editorial Committee issues a decision: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
  5. Revision & Re-evaluation — Authors submit revised manuscripts addressing reviewer comments; revised versions may be re-reviewed.
  6. Final Acceptance & Publication Assignment — Accepted papers are routed to either the Springer edited book series or the Scopus-indexed journal track based on quality, scope, and strategic fit.

Timeline (Indicative)

Note: dates below align with the important dates listed on the Submission Guidelines page.

  • Acceptance notification target: 1 December 2025
  • Full paper submission deadline: 30 June 2026

Reviewer Assignment & Confidentiality

Reviewers are selected for expertise and lack of conflicts of interest. The review process will be single-anonymous by default (reviewers know authors, authors do not know reviewers). Reviewer identities are confidential; reviewer comments are shared with authors after anonymisation.

Decision Categories

AcceptMinor RevisionMajor RevisionReject

Appeals Policy

If authors believe a decision was reached unfairly, they may submit a concise appeal within 14 days of the decision. Appeals must summarise reasons and new evidence; appeals are reviewed by an independent committee whose decision is final.

Review Criteria & Scoring Rubric

Reviewers are asked to score manuscripts on a 1–5 scale (1 = Poor, 5 = Excellent) for each criterion below:

  • Novelty Scientific originality and contribution to the field.
  • Methodology Rigor, appropriateness, and reproducibility of methods.
  • Results & Analysis Clarity and robustness of results and statistical/analytical treatment.
  • Clarity & Structure Organisation, readability, and presentation quality.
  • Significance Relevance to conference themes and practical/academic impact.
  • References & Ethics Adequacy of literature review, citations, and ethical compliance.

Reviewers also provide constructive comments to help authors improve the manuscript, regardless of the decision.

Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Provide an objective, timely and constructive review.
  • Declare any conflicts of interest and decline review if conflicted.
  • Keep manuscript content confidential and not use it for personal advantage.
  • Follow ethical guidelines and report suspected plagiarism or misconduct to the editors.

Editor & Committee Roles

The Editorial Committee coordinates reviewer selection, resolves disagreements, oversees appeals and ensures final publication decisions follow ethical standards and journal/book requirements.

Abstract Submission Guidelines

Follow the official ICEEA-2026 & ICETS-2026 abstract structure for consistency and review clarity.

TITLE (Arial 12, Bold)

Use a concise title that clearly summarizes the abstract content.

AUTHORS (Arial 11)

Enter complete author names and affiliations.

Example:

John Doe¹, Jane Smith¹, Carlos Perez² ¹ University A ² University B

(Bold the presenting author &apos s name.)

ABSTRACT TEXT (Arial 11)

  • Background: Briefly describe the context or rationale.
  • Aim / Objectives: Clearly state the main objectives.
  • Methods: Summarize methodology, tools, and approaches.
  • Results: Present key findings.
  • Conclusions: Summarize implications or significance.

Keywords: keyword1; keyword2; keyword3; keyword4; keyword5

Acknowledgments (if any): Mention funding, grants, or institutional support.

TÍTULO (Arial 12, Negrita)

Use un título conciso que resuma el contenido del resumen.

AUTORES (Arial 11)

Ingrese los nombres completos de los autores y sus afiliaciones.

Ejemplo:

John Doe¹, Jane Smith¹, Carlos Pérez² ¹ Universidad A ² Universidad B

(Resalte en negrita el autor que presentará el trabajo.)

TEXTO DEL RESUMEN (Arial 11)

  • Antecedentes: Describa brevemente el contexto.
  • Objetivos / Metas: Indique los objetivos principales.
  • Métodos: Resuma metodología, herramientas y enfoques.
  • Resultados: Presente hallazgos clave.
  • Conclusiones: Resuma la relevancia e implicaciones.

Palabras clave: palabra1; palabra2; palabra3; palabra4; palabra5

Agradecimientos (si corresponde): Mencione financiamiento, becas o apoyo institucional.