This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

paper_format_for_review [2019/03/26 15:44] (current)
nakano created
Line 1: Line 1:
 +====== Paper Format For Review ======
 +This Web page shows **Paper Formatting Guideline** for review, which is applied to CANDAR main symposium and workshops (excluding NCSS workshop).
 +This page is not for for NCSS workshop. Papers submitted to NCSS workshop must be the final version and should include authors names and affiliations.
 +**Important**:​ For fairness of review process and paper selection, papers will be reviewed by **double blind**. So they should not contain authors names and affiliations,​ any grant information,​ and personal acknowledgements by which authors can be identified.
 +Further, authors prior works must be referred to as **3rd-persons works**. ​
 +Papers do not follow the submission guidelines including paper format, page length, and anonymity of authors, will not be accepted.
 +===== Paper Format =====
 +Submitted paper must use **IEEE standard US-letter two-column format** ([[http://​www.ieee.org/​conferences_events/​conferences/​publishing/​templates.html]]).
 +===== Page limitation =====
 +  * CANDAR main symposium
 +    * Long paper: 8-10 pages
 +    * Regular paper: 5-7 pages
 +  * Workshops ​ (excluding WANC and NCSS)
 +    * Regular paper: 5-7 pages
 +    * Poster paper: 3-4 pages
 +  * WANC workshop
 +    * Short paper: 4-5 pages
 +    * Poster paper: 2-3 pages
 +Submitted paper may be accepted as papers in shorter page-length category.
 +For example, CANDAR Long paper maybe accepted as CANDAR Regular paper.
 +If this is the case, the final paper must satisfy the page limitation of CANDAR Regular paper.
 +=====Double-blind review=====
 +Papers should **NOT** contain
 +  authors names and affiliations
 +  grant information and personal acknowledgements
 +On the other hand, authors previous related works **should not be omitted**, and
 +they must be referred to as **3rd-persons works**.
 +For example, if you improve your own prior work, you should write:
 +  While the authors of [?] did X, this paper additionally did Y.
 +You SHOULD NOT write:
 +  While our previous paper of [?] did X, this paper additionally did Y.
 +Please see {{ :​doubleblind.pdf |Sample PDF file}} for the details.
 +Papers do not satisfy these conditions for double-blind review may be rejected without review.