The work of the members of the Technical Program Committee (TPC) strongly defines the quality of the conference. Only papers that meet the quality standard of a scientific publication should be marked as ACCEPT, clearly stating why that work is being accepted. In particular, essential elements for a scientific article to be published include:
- Article sections:
- Introduction – including context of the work and clear contributions regarding previous works published by the authors (if any).
- Related work – it is essential to identify the contribution of the article in the context of the field; other proposals that address the topic or similar topics must be analyzed in relation to the article.
- Proposal – it represents the main contribution of the paper; it must clearly describe the work in terms of the research methodology that was followed in order to achieve the presented results. It should represent at least 40-50% of the article contents.
- Validation – a section that clearly states how the work was validated (case study, application example, experimentation, benchmarking, etc.) and describes the results of the validation.
- Conclusions and future work – a section that summarizes the conclusions of the work and its validation, the main contributions to the area, as well as other planned or future work.The titles of the sections may be different, but it is expected that the article includes the contents mentioned above in order to be accepted. There could also be other sections such as a background section where important concepts are introduced. However, these sections should not represent more than 10% of the article since it is assumed that those attending the symposia are familiar with the field and have the necessary background.
- Article contents: Based on the discussed points, it is important to assess the contribution of the paper to the knowledge area in the context of the related works, also considering the research methodology and the obtained results.
– What research questions and objectives were posed? Were they properly answered and reached?
– What research process was followed? How were the presented results achieved?
– How was the work validated? Is the validation in accordance with the approach?
– What are the implications of the work for the area? What are its real contributions? Does the paper clearly identify what is its added value to the field?