Paper Submission

Submissions must be original and should not have been published previously or be under consideration for publication while being evaluated for this conference. After a careful reviewing process, all accepted papers after proper registration and presentation will be published into a volume of conference Proceedings, which will be submitted to be indexed by Ei Compendex, Scopus.

  • Submission Method

    Electronic Submission System

  • Contribution Type

    Full Paper/Conference proceedings (for Publication and Presentation)
    Full paper submission is required. The final manuscript will not be published without advance registration after receiving paper acceptance notification.
    Presentation 15 minutes.

    Abstract/Oral/Poster Presentation Only (Without publication)
    Only abstract submission is required. The abstract cannot be orally presented without advance registration after receiving abstract acceptance notification. And the abstract won't be published in conference proceedings or journal.
    Presentation 15 minutes.

  • Contribution Format

    Microsoft Word Template

    Latex Template

    Manuscripts should be at least 8 full pages. One regular registration can cover a paper within 10 pages, including all figures, tables, and references, Extra pages will be charged.

    Your full paper submission should contain the following:

    Paper title
    Name, institute affiliation, mailing address, and email address for all authors
    Abstract
    Key Words
    Conference Topic
    Introduction
    Body of paper
    Tables, figures, etc. in their proper position in the paper (if applicable)
    Conclusion
    References (no less than 10, references of recent years are preferred)

    Importante Notice:

    Identify one author as the corresponding author (All future communications will be done through the corresponding author)

    The corresponding author should take the approval of all authors for submission. Generally AIPR will not be responsible to answer co-authors of the manuscript.

    The Corresponding author is responsible for the full paper submitted to AIPR. Co-authors' names, affiliations and email addresses should be correctly mentioned in the manuscripts and entered in the submission system.

    The manuscript should be in English and checked for grammar and language errors

    All contributors included in your paper should properly acknowledge with referencing and citations.

    If the reviewers suggest major revisions authors will be provided more time to revise the manuscript. In such a scenario, the publication of the manuscript will be pushed to the next issue.

    Tables, figures and images should be properly named and of good quality.

    If your study has been funded or supported by any institution, agency, etc, please indicate the same under “Acknowledgement”

  • Review Policy

    AIPR will not accept any paper which, at the time of submission, is under reviewing, is accepted for publication, or has already been published in another conference or journal. Authors are also expected not to submit their papers elsewhere during the reviewing period. Submitted papers are expected to contain original work executed by the authors with adequate, proper and scholarly citations to the work of others. It is the job of the authors to clearly identify both their own contribution(s) and also published results / techniques on which they depend or build. Reviewers are charged to ensure these standards are met.

  • Changes of Title/Abstract/Authorship

    Authors should include a full title for their paper, as well as a complete abstract by the abstract submission deadline. Submission titles should not be modified after the abstract submission deadline, and abstracts should not be modified by more than 50% after the abstract submission deadline. Submissions violating these rules may be deleted after the paper submission deadline without reviewing. The author list at the registration and submission deadline will be considered final, and no changes in authorship will be permitted for final papers.

  • Statements on the Review Process

    We are committed to maintaining a high standard of quality in the conference proceedings and ensuring that the research presented is both valuable and impactful. The review process is an integral part of this commitment, and we appreciate the dedication of our reviewers and authors in contributing to the success of the conference. Our rigorous review process involves the following key elements:

    Double-Blind Peer Review: All submitted papers undergo a double-blind peer review, where both the authors' identities and the reviewers' identities are kept confidential. This process minimizes biases and ensures that the evaluation is solely based on the quality and significance of the research.

    Expert Reviewers: We engage a panel of expert reviewers who are well-versed in the various subfields of conference scope. These reviewers bring extensive knowledge and insights to assess the technical content, originality, methodology, and significance of each submission.

    Criteria for Evaluation: Reviewers evaluate submissions based on several criteria, including the clarity and coherence of the research objectives, the appropriateness of the methodology, the accuracy of the results, the significance of the findings, and the overall contribution to the field.

    Originality and Innovation: Emphasis is placed on the originality and innovation of the research. We encourage submissions that introduce novel ideas, methodologies, and perspectives to the communications and broadband networking domain.

    Constructive Feedback: Reviewers provide constructive feedback to authors, highlighting strengths and suggesting areas for improvement. This feedback is intended to help authors refine their work and contribute to the overall quality of the conference proceedings.

    Fairness and Objectivity: The review process is conducted with fairness and objectivity as core principles. We ensure that each submission receives a thorough evaluation, and decisions are made based on a consensus reached among the reviewers.

    Ethical Considerations: Authors are expected to adhere to ethical guidelines, including proper citation of prior work and the avoidance of plagiarism. Submissions that do not meet these ethical standards may be rejected during the review process.

    Revision Opportunity: Authors whose submissions receive conditional acceptance or recommendations for revision will have the opportunity to address reviewers' comments and enhance their work before final acceptance.