It gives us immense pleasure to invite you to submit your original, and unpublished research findings related to the FSAET-2023 theme. 

​

General Instructions for Preparation of the Manuscript

​

All submitted papers will be checked for Plagiarism and papers with less than 10% similarity will be considered for the further review process.

Here's a description of the typical peer review process:

 

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

​

​

​

​

1. Submission:

Authors submit their research manuscripts to the CMT Portal.  The manuscript includes details about the Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, methodology, results, and conclusions, references.

2. Preliminary Review:

Upon submission, the editorial team performs an initial review to check if the manuscript adheres to the submission guidelines and basic formatting standards. If the manuscript meets these requirements, it proceeds to the next step.

3. Double Blind Peer Review:

The selected reviewers thoroughly examine the manuscript to assess its quality, significance, originality, methodology, and overall contribution to the field. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations for improvement.

4. Reviewer Reports:

Reviewers typically provide detailed written feedback to the authors. They might comment on the strengths, weaknesses, and potential areas for enhancement in terms of methodology, analysis, clarity of writing, and relevance to the field.

5. Decision Making:

Based on the feedback from reviewers, the program committee makes a decision regarding the manuscript. Possible decisions include:

Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted for publication or presentation as-is or with minor revisions.

Major Revision: The manuscript requires significant revisions before it can be accepted.

Minor Revision: The manuscript needs minor revisions to address specific concerns.

Rejection: The manuscript is not suitable for publication due to various reasons, such as lack of novelty, insufficient quality, or misalignment with the conference or journal's scope.

6. Author Revision:

If revisions are requested, authors modify the manuscript based on the feedback received from reviewers. They provide a response to each reviewer's comment, explaining how they addressed the concerns.

7. Double-Blind Re-review:

Revised manuscripts are often sent back to the original reviewers for a follow-up review. Reviewers assess whether the authors have adequately addressed the concerns raised in the initial review.

8. Final Decision:

The program committee makes the final decision based on the revised manuscript and the reviewer's assessment. The manuscript could be accepted, accepted with minor revisions, sent back for further revision, or rejected.

9. Publication or Presentation:

Once the manuscript is accepted, it undergoes final editing, formatting, and preparation for publication in the conference proceedings.

The peer review process ensures that published research meets high standards of quality, contributes to the advancement of knowledge, and maintains the integrity of the academic and scientific community. It helps prevent the dissemination of erroneous or unverified information while fostering a culture of critical evaluation and improvement in research.

​