Instructions:

Please make sure to use the Paper Template provided in the submission tab on the conference website/ by the journal for formatting your paper. The paper must be original and should not have been submitted, published, or currently under review for any other journal or conference.
Regular papers should present novel perspectives within the general scope of the conference. Short papers (Work-in-Progress) are an opportunity to present preliminary or interim results. The paper length should be at least in the range of 6 to 8 pages.
Literature reviews/survey papers will only be considered if they present a new perspective or clearly benefit the field. To be published, such papers must go beyond a review of the literature to define the field in a new way or highlight exciting new technologies or areas of research.

The plagiarism should be less than 15%

The full article must be submitted as a MS Word file in DOC or DOCX format.
All submitted papers will be subjected to a “similarity check” by Plagiarism Software (Turnitin). Papers having less than 15% (less than 4% from single source) similarity score will be examined and those that are deemed unacceptable will be rejected/withdrawn without a formal review.
Articles should not be drafted using any AI content generator.
Before submitting your paper, please make sure the English is clear, concise, and coherent, especially if English is not your first language.

NOTE: At least one author must register for the paper to be included in the conference. Only registered and presenting authors will be allowed to present their papers and will receive conference certificates. Papers will only be considered for publication if presented at the conference. To promote diversity and inclusivity, no individual will be allowed to make more than two presentations. Additionally, no paper should have more than 6 authors.

How to submit a manuscript?

Please note that the committee only accepts full-length papers for review, not abstracts.
Perspective authors shall submit the full-length manuscripts via given submission link –PAPER SUBMISSION LINK

Downloads

Download Copyright Form ICCEMME 2025
Download Paper Template ICCEMME 2025
Download Publication Ethics ICCEMME 2025

ICCEMME-2025 Review Process

Peer review is an integral part of scientific publishing that confirms the validity of the science reported.

Initial Check (Desk Review)

Papers submitted in a conference ICCEMME-2025 undergoes a strict peer review process to ensure its relevance, quality and originality. if Relevant then move to next step otherwise rejected from the Desk.

ICCEMME-2025 conference manuscript can be rejected if it:

• Lacks proper structure, Lacks the necessary detail for readers to fully understand the authors' analysis.
• Does not clearly explain which parts of the findings are new science, versus what was already known.
• Lacks up-to-date references.
• Contains theories, concepts, or conclusions that are not fully supported by its data, arguments, and information.
• Does not provide enough details about materials and methods to allow other scientists to repeat the experiment.
• Lacks clear descriptions or explanations of:
  - Hypotheses tested
  - The experimental design
  - Sample characteristics and descriptive statistics
• Has a weak study design or faulty statistical analysis.
• Has poor language quality.

Plagiarism Check
If paper relevant to conference theme or track then it will proceed for plagiarism check (Used Turnitin Software). If similarity index is more than as per the conference policy, it will revert back to the author for correction (Note: AI write paper is not reconsider).

Assign to Potential Reviewer
Once a paper passes the initial and plagiarism screening, it is assigned to reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Each paper is assigned to 2–3 expert reviewers.

Peer Review Process
Double-Blind Peer Review Process is used in conference paper evaluation

Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers assess the paper based on several key factors:
Relevance: Does the paper align with the conference theme or track?
Originality: Is the research novel and does it contribute new knowledge?
Methodology: Are the research methods sound and appropriate?
Clarity: Is the paper well-written, organized, and easy to follow?
Significance: Does the research have potential implications or impact in the field?
Supporting Evidence: Are the results backed by sufficient data or analysis?
Each criterion is typically scored, and reviewers provide comments to support their assessment.

Decision Phase
After the peer review is complete, the conference’s editors and program committee evaluate the reviewers’ feedback and recommendations to make final decisions. The possible outcomes include:
Accepted: The paper is accepted as-is or with minor revisions.
Accepted with Revisions: Authors must address reviewers’ comments before the final submission.
Rejected: The paper does not meet the conference’s standards or fit its scope.

Feedback/Comments to Authors
A decision notification along with reviewers’ comments and suggestions. These comments may include:
Specific criticisms or questions about the methodology or conclusions.
Suggestions for improving clarity, formatting, or language.
Feedback on the overall contribution of the paper to the field.

Final Submission
For accepted papers, authors must submit a revised version incorporating reviewer feedback. The final submission is reviewed again to ensure all issues have been addressed.
After approval and Presented paper is included in the conference proceedings

*The Microsoft CMT service was used for managing the peer-reviewing process for this conference. This service was provided for free by Microsoft and they bore all expenses, including costs for Azure cloud services as well as for software development and support.