Statement of Peer Review ^†

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 that are expected of a proceedings journal.

• Type of peer review: single-blind.
• Conference submission management system: webpage and email.
• Number of submissions sent for review: 55.
• Number of submissions accepted: 54.
• Acceptance rate (number of submissions accepted/number of submissions received): 96%.
• Average number of reviews per paper: 2.
• Total number of reviewers involved: 14.
• Peer-review process and regulations:
  • Our approach to manuscript review follows a single-blind process. In this format, the authors’ identities are concealed from the reviewers, while the reviewers’ identities remain anonymous to the authors. This system is designed to minimize bias and encourage an impartial evaluation of the work.
  • Each submitted paper is carefully evaluated by experts in the relevant field. Reviewers assess the manuscript based on the following key criteria:

    ○

    Originality: The manuscript’s contribution to the existing body of knowledge is critically examined. Reviewers consider whether the research presents new insights, innovative approaches, or original data.

    ○

    Novelty of the Topic: The relevance and novelty of the research topic are key factors. Reviewers evaluate whether the topic addresses emerging trends or gaps in the field and if it has the potential to significantly advance knowledge in the area.

    ○

    Methodological Rigor: Reviewers scrutinize the research design, data collection, analysis methods, and overall methodology to ensure that the study is scientifically sound and replicable. They look for appropriate use of techniques, statistical validity, and transparency in the methods.

    ○

    Clarity of Presentation: The readability, structure, and logical flow of the manuscript are assessed. Reviewers provide feedback on the clarity of arguments, the quality of writing, and whether the results and conclusions are well supported by the data.

    ○

    Consistency with the Journal’s Scope: Finally, reviewers assess whether the paper aligns with the themes and focus of the journal. The manuscript should contribute to the overarching objectives of the journal and resonate with its readership.

    • After the review process, the Editor makes a decision based on the reviewers’ comments, which may include revisions, acceptance, or rejection of the paper. This resulted in 14 papers being accepted at the submission stage, 32 papers being accepted after minor revisions, 8 papers being accepted after major revisions, and 1 being rejected. All revised papers were reviewed in their modified form before acceptance. This rigorous process ensures that only high-quality, impactful research is published in Engineering Proceedings.