All contributed presentations and posters will have the opportunity to be published in a volume of AIP Publishing’s Conference Proceedings (CP). The following instructions are valid for the contributed oral and posters. Invited talks will be processed with a different workflow, and will be contacted directly with the necessary information.

Timetable

Below is the overall timetable for the paper processing schedule. In order to meet the publishing schedule, the dates in the timetable will have to be strictly applied.

• Paper submission deadline: 13 October 2017
• Conference: 15 -20 October 2017
• Paper review referee’s deadline: 03 November 2017
• Inform authors of required corrections: 10 November 2017
• Paper (corrected, final) author’s deadline: 01 December 2017

Preparation

The AIP templates for Word or Latex should be used. AIP templates here
Copies are maintained on our website at: https://indico.cern.ch/event/628126/papers/

The page limits are given in the table below:

For the AIP proceeding, authors must provide correctly formatted pdf documents according to the information present in the AIP template files. The conference editing team will not accept source files, only the final pdf files and required permission files. The corresponding author is responsible for correctly formatting the pdf file. We cannot guarantee the publication of any pdfs not conforming at the 01 December 2017 final deadline.

Adding line numbers for review

Contributed papers to ICIS17 will be reviewed by at least one content reviewer at the conference, as well as a format reviewer. To make it easier for the reviewer, and yourself, please enable line numbering in your initial submission. These line numbers must be removed for your final submission after the reviewing process.

• Word: Enable line numbers to your document by selecting the Layout Ribbon -> Page Setup zone -> Line Numbers -> Continuous
• LaTeX: Please insert the following lines into the header of your LaTeX document (for your pre conference) submission.
  

  \usepackage{lineno}
\linenumbers​

Additionally we ask you to please check your abstract in the contributions section of the ICIS17 indico site, which may have been edited since your first abstract submission, and to use this version to save editing time.

We ask you also to review the Editorial Procedure and Advice for Reviewers sections below, in order to produce a high quality paper.

Please note that all conference delegates may be asked to contribute to the reviewing process.

Submission FAQ

• How should I name the files?

An email was sent to you (the original abstract submitter) on 19/09/2017 detailing the file numbering system to use for your files, please follow the convention described therein. If you have not received this information, please email our admin email address Admin.ICIS17@cern.ch .

• Where do I send the files?

Files are to be uploaded to https://indico.cern.ch/e/ICIS17/ and login using the button in the top right hand corner, using the account you used to create the abstract.

• I need to resubmit a new version before the deadline.

By default, authors cannot re-submit a new version even before the paper deadline. If an error in the submission was made, please send an email:

To: Admin.ICIS17@cern.ch
Subject: RESUBMISSION ID xxx

You will be able to resubmit your file once you have received an email saying your submission has been judged and needs resubmission.

• Can I revise my submission after the deadline?

The file present at the deadline will be processed for reviewing. In order for the reviewer(s) to provide a consistent review(s) we cannot allow resubmission until the review(s) are received. In some circumstance the editorial team may contact you requesting a rapid resubmission (for example if the wrong template was used).

• Will I be asked to make corrections?

All papers will be peer reviewed for content, and also verified for formatting. You will be contacted in November with comments from reviewers for implementation. More details are given in the section below.

Editorial Procedure for Contributed ICIS'17 Papers and Posters ^†

Two reviewers have been selected for each manuscript (contributed orals and posters) and are accepted for publication based on favourable recommendations by the reviewer(s). Reviewer reports are advisory to the editor(s) and should be written in an understandable and collegial manner.

Any resubmitted manuscript should be accompanied by a summary of changes made, and a brief response to all recommendations and criticisms. This material will be forwarded to the reviewer(s) and should be written also in an understandable and collegial manner.

If a manuscript has several authors, one of them, the corresponding author, should be designated to receive and respond to correspondence from the reviewer(s) and editor(s). It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to represent all those involved with the work reported. By submitting the manuscript, the corresponding author certifies:

• The paper represents original work of the listed authors.
• The submitted manuscript accurately reflects the scientific results.
• All authors of the manuscript made significant contributions to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the research study.
• All those who made significant contributions were offered the opportunity to be listed as authors.
•  All of the listed authors are aware of and agree to the submission of this manuscript.
• The manuscript has not been published, and is not now and will not be under consideration by another journal while it is considered for ICIS'17.
• The authors accept the established procedures for selecting manuscripts for publication.

Advice to Reviewers for ICIS'17 ^†

1. Review Criteria for Manuscripts
   For the review of a submitted ICIS'17 manuscript, we ask all reviewers to write an incisive and well-justified report that considers the following points:

   • Are the title and abstract informative, concise and clear?
   • Is the paper well organized and clearly written in good scientific English?
   • Are all used abbreviations and acronyms explained in the paper, comprising the title and abstract?
   • Is the paper scientifically sound and not misleading?
   • Does the paper contain appropriate and adequate references to related and previous work?
   • Are all manuscript figures and tables (if any) clear and useful with suitable captions, or is there unnecessary duplication from previous publications?
   • Is the manuscript proposed for publication, either immediately (w/o modifications) or after corrections by the author(s).

2. Anonymity and Confidentiality of the ICIS'17 Review Process
   Anonymous review is requested for the ICIS'17 publication process. Therefore, the identity of the selected reviewers is not released to authors throughout or after the review process. Reviewers must treat all materials associated with the review process as confidential. This includes the manuscript itself and any related material provided by the authors including any other correspondence. Reviewers may consult and seek advice from other researchers or colleagues; the reviewer must ensure that the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript is preserved.

^† Adopted from Editorial Policies and Practices of Physical Review Accelerators and Beams