The abstract review group consisting of technical committee members will undertake a review of all abstracts and provisionally allocate acceptable ones into a draft program for the Technical Committee Chairman’s consideration.
Abstract Submission Closes - 30th April 2020
Response to Authors - 15th May 2020
Technical Program Finalized - 12th June 2020
Technical Committee members will review abstracts submitted for their session based on the Abstract Review Criteria and will submit the Abstract Score on the system no later than 7th May 2020.
|Criteria||Score ( 0-5)|
|Quality of Content||Introduction/Rationale|
|Educational Value||Interest and appeal to process engineering audience|
|Important contribution to research/practice/theory or knowledge|
|Novel or innovative contribution, relevant to the conference theme|
|Quality of Written Abstract||Coherent & readable|
Each abstract will be reviewed by 3-5 committee members and GDA SMEs and final acceptance will be done by the Technical Committee Co-Chairs.
Quality of Content
Introduction or rationale must provide a clear background to the rest of the abstract and should be reinforced in the conclusion.
Objectives must outline the content or expectations of either the project (generally appropriate for research, practical case studies and education topics) or the presentation (may be more appropriate for experience-based presentations, workshops or other presentation formats).
Methods or approach must provide a clear description of the methodology used, and it must be appropriate to the objectives and rationale of the project or presentation.
Results or practice implications must indicate clearly the findings of the project/presentation, and they must be consistent with the methodology and objectives.
Conclusions must be consistent with the introduction or rationale and objectives so that the information is complete.
Interest and appeal to process engineering audience
What would be of interest to them? Is the content relevant? Does it bring a perspective that is relevant to current practice?
Important contribution to research/practice/theory or knowledge
Does the abstract indicate the possibility of changing current practice? Does it add significantly to the current body of work in this area?
Novel or innovative contribution, relevant to the conference theme
Is the information novel/unique/innovative in some way? Is the approach or methodology new or different from known approaches? Do the results provide support for a new approach or for changing an accepted approach? Are the ideas presented provocative? Does the abstract reflect the theme of the conference?
Quality of Written Abstract
Is the abstract self-contained? It is important to consider grammar and writing style in this section only, and not let poor grammar influence all ratings; some readers rate this section first and rate on first impressions. Try to be objective. Look for judicious use of acronyms, abbreviations, references.
Coherent & Readable
The abstract should be clear on first reading; repeated readings for clarity indicates lower readability. The content should be in a logical sequence. Remember that English may not be the first language of many authors.