Peer Review Process

ISRM 2026 is committed to maintaining high academic standards through a fair, transparent, and rigorous peer review process. All submitted manuscripts undergo an independent review to ensure scientific quality, originality, and relevance to the conference themes.

The review process follows the steps below.

1. Initial Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the official conference submission system before the submission deadline.

The Editorial Team verifies that all required submission files have been provided and that the manuscript follows the conference formatting requirements.

2. Editorial Screening

Before entering the peer review stage, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening to evaluate:

• Compliance with the conference scope.
• Manuscript completeness and formatting.
• English language readability.
• Originality and potential ethical concerns.

Manuscripts that do not satisfy these basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or declined before peer review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Eligible manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript’s subject area.

ISRM 2026 adopts a double-blind peer review process, in which:

• Reviewers do not know the identities of the authors.
• Authors do not know the identities of the reviewers.

This approach helps ensure an objective and unbiased evaluation.

4. Evaluation Criteria

Each manuscript is assessed based on:

• Originality and novelty
• Scientific contribution
• Research methodology
• Technical quality
• Clarity of presentation
• Quality of references
• Relevance to the conference scope

---

5. Review Decision

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editorial Team and Scientific Committee may reach one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Accept with Minor Revisions
• Major Revisions Required
• Reject

Where reviewer recommendations differ significantly, the manuscript may be assigned to an additional reviewer.

6. Revision

Authors receiving revision requests should submit a revised manuscript together with a response addressing the reviewers’ comments within the specified deadline.

Failure to submit revisions on time may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from the review process.

7. Final Decision

The final publication decision is made by the Scientific Committee after considering:

• reviewers’ comments,
• authors’ revisions,
• manuscript quality,
• and compliance with conference policies.

The decision of the Scientific Committee is final.

8. Camera-Ready Submission

Authors of accepted papers are required to submit the final camera-ready version of their manuscript and complete the registration process before the specified deadline.

Only accepted papers that satisfy all conference requirements will be included in the conference proceedings and considered for publication opportunities.

---