In order to expedite review process, reviewers are asked to complete the review within three weeks of receipt of the manuscript. Reminders of deadlines will be sent to the reviewers from the Publications Office in pursuit of this deadline.
For a recommendation of acceptance for publication, the following two criteria are necessary: ORIGINALITY (innovation or novelty) and PRESENTATION (a well written manuscript within the scope of ICT Express). Reviewers are asked to evaluate both the quality of the technical contribution and the quality of the presentation. In addition, the manuscript must be new and previously unpublished with interesting contributions to ICT convergence. Given that ICT Express focuses mainly on ICT convergence and its applications, manuscripts do not necessarily include lots of mathematics to imply that the problems under consideration are worth solving. It is rather important for reviewers to evaluate the manuscripts whether the contributions are interesting and potentially relevant to a fundamental problem/question in convergence of information and communication technology or some related application domains.
To expedite review process, reviewers are asked to make a binary decision for each manuscript according to the following codes:
A = Manuscript is accepted for publication. Manuscript may be required to incorporate some minor amendments as noted in the Comments part of the review. Note that the revised manuscript will not be returned to the reviewers, but the corresponding editor will make a final decision without further review after determining whether the revision properly addressed all the comments in the reviews.
R = Manuscript is reject if the manuscript requires some major changes by the author, a major rewrite and/or additional experiments are needed such that the author is unlikely to be able to complete the revision within 4 weeks. However, the authors may be encouraged to resubmit.
Please provide detailed comments in the review form that will help the authors amend the manuscript for publication, especially for a score of reject, they will help the author understand why the manuscript is unacceptable for publication. They are also important to the Associate Editor in making a final decision for the manuscript. Typically a review consists of a brief summary of the paper followed by descriptions about its contributions; a discussion of the novelty and importance of these contributions; a list of major comments; and finally a list of minor comments and corrections.