MEMS 2019 will have a Double-Blind Review Process
In DBR, the authors’ identity is hidden from the reviewers until the review process is completed. This is in contrast to a single-blind review process, where the reviewer identity is hidden from the authors, but the reviewers know the author identity.
We have chosen for the DBR process format to focus the evaluation process on the quality of the submission by reducing human biases with respect to the authors’ reputation and institution and thus to ensure that abstract evaluations are as fair as possible and of the highest possible quality.
When obtaining an abstract reference number, the authors fill out their name(s) and contact data via the website. This identity data is accessible to the conference organizers but not to the reviewers in the technical program committee (TPC). Be aware that not all TPC members will read every abstract.
The submitting author will receive an abstract reference number, which is the abstract identifier that must be added on the top right corner of your two-page abstract. This abstract reference number will be the only way to identify your abstract during the review process.
Your identity will be revealed to the TPC members only after a decision has been made on whether the abstract has been selected for presentation at MEMS 2019.
The two-page abstract must be formatted as outlined in the template that can be downloaded here Download
The three important differences in the abstract writing are as follows;
- The abstract must not contain the author names, affiliations, or contact data, or any other text formulations that would reveal the identity of the authors.
- References to previously published work must be written in a neutral manner, both when referring to your own previous work or to previous work from others. For example: “Previous work [ref] has shown…” or “Somebodysname et al. have shown…” and not “In our previous work [ref] we have shown…” . In the reference list at the bottom of the page or on the figure page, you provide the full reference to the work. If your name is S. Ample, you would write “S. Ample et al., “Publication Title”, Journal of MEMS, vol 1, pp.xx-yy, 2012”
- Referencing to your own yet unpublished work, which is not yet publically available to the reviewers, must be annotated in the following manner. In the text you must refer to your work without mentioning your name, for example: “Previous work [ref] has shown…” or S. Ample et at. Have shown…”, and not “S. Ample et al. have shown…”, In the reference list at the bottom or on the figure page, you must ONLY write: “Unpublished Reference”, i.e. you must NOT write the full reference to this work. On the Abstract Upload Page, there is a specific box, entitled “Unpublished references”, in which you must write the full references to any unpublished work, for example “S. Ample et al., “Publication Title”, accepted at Transducers 2018.” Upon request from the reviewers, the conference organizers’ administrative staff will retrieve the unpublished manuscripts, blind them by hand, and make them available to the reviewers. Note that the conference organizers have agreements for such actions with most publishers and most of the other large conference series related to the MEMS field.
Please make sure to do the following before uploading your abstract:
- Remove any authors and affiliations at the top of your abstract
- Please refer to any of your previous work in a neutral manner. Instead of “We” or “Our”, replace with “Their”
- Make sure to identify any Conflict of Interests in the TPC on your Abstract Information Form
- If your referenced work has not been published, please provide us with the appropriate reference on the “Upload” form.