All papers in the proceedings of the regular program and proceedings of the workshops, will be published by conference proceedings.
Peer Review Policy
All submissions to CSSS are first reviewed for completeness and only then sent to be assessed by an the Programme Chairs or Organizing Committee Chairs. Programme Chairs or Organizing Committee Chairs will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. Chairs will consider the peer-reviewed reports before making a decision, but are not bound by the opinions or recommendations therein. A concern raised by a peer reviewer or the Chairs themself may result in the manuscript being rejected. Authors receive peer review reports with the decision on their manuscript.
We ask reviewers the following types of questions, to provide an assessment of the various aspects of a manuscript:
Main results: please summarize the outstanding characteristics of your works.
Validity: are there any flaws in the manuscript that should be prohibited from publication? If yes, please provide details.
Originality and significance: if the conclusion is not original, please provide relevant references.
Data and methods: please comment on the effectiveness, data quality and presentation quality of this method.
Appropriate use of statistics and handling of uncertainty: all error bars shall be defined in the corresponding legend; If this is not the case, please comment.
Conclusion: do you think the conclusions and data interpretation are robust, effective and reliable?
Suggestions for improvement: Please list the suggestions that will help to strengthen the revision.
References: does this manuscript properly cite previous literature?
All submissions must be in English.
All submissions must be in letter-sized.
All fonts and subsets must be embedded.