In submitting conference proceedings to Engineering Proceedings, the volume editors of the proceedings certify to the publisher that all papers published in this volume have been subjected to peer review administered by the volume editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal.
- Type of peer review: single-blind; double-blind; triple-blind; open; other (please describe): The type of peer review at the II International Congress on Technology and Innovation in Engineering and Computer Science, Lima, Peru, 21–25 November 2022, was single-blind review in which the authors did not know the identity of the reviewers, but the reviewers did know the identity of the authors.
- Conference Submission Management System
First phase: Submission of abstracts in lines through https://descubre.usil.edu.pe/eventos/congreso-ingenieria/. All accepted papers were presented as 50-min papers during the congress. In this phase, the peer review was single-blind.
Submission: Submit a short abstract in English (300 words) by 31 October 2022.
Evaluation: The Scientific Committee evaluated all submitted abstracts and authors were notified about acceptance by 7 November 2022. Submitted papers must not be published or under review in any other national or international conference or publication.
Invitation: Authors of accepted abstracts were invited to submit proceedings papers by 20 November 2022, (maximum six pages, in the template that will be sent by mail).
Presentation: All accepted papers were presented during the congress orally and online for 50 minutes (21–25 November 2022).
Second Phase: Submission of proceedings papers of six to nine pages maximum according to the instructions for authors of Engineering Proceedings. https://www.mdpi.com/journal/engproc/instructions. In this phase, the peer review was single blind.
- Number of submissions sent for review: 40
- Abstracts approved in the first phase: 24
- Proceedings approved in the second phase: 5
- First phase: 1.66
- Second phase: 4.8
- Average number of reviews per paper: 4
- Total number of reviewers involved: 16
- Peer-Review Process and Regulations
The peer review was performed using the easy chair software. The chief editor of the congress performed a first review of compliance with the required format; if this first review was passed, each reviewer was notified via email, after which they had a period of 15 working days to give a first response: accepted, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejected.
The abstracts/proceedings were sent to at least two reviewers; if accepted in the first instance, the authors were notified by e-mail.
Abstracts/proceedings with minor revisions or comments were notified via e-mail to the authors within 7 working days.
Abstracts/proceedings with major revisions were rejected, and authors were notified via e-mail.
Rejected abstracts/proceedings were rejected in the first instance by the editor-in-chief without going to the reviewers, due to formatting and low academic level observations.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).