Reviewer Guidelines

During the peer review process, the reviewer provides an assessment based on the following points:

Effectiveness of Article Title: The title of an article in a conference must reflect the essence of the content of the article, be specific and effective as measured by the straightforwardness of the writing and its informativeness.

Abstract: The abstract content of the article contains the following, namely research objectives, brief methods, findings, and conclusions.

Originality of Scientific Work: The originality of conferences is determined by the state of the art of science and technology, the sophistication of viewpoints and/or approaches, the novelty of findings for science (novelties, new contributions to science), the completeness of the work (not just repeating previous similar research , does not mutate methods and objects), the greatness of the theory and the breadth of application in each article it contains.

Research Methods: Suitability of research methods and sufficiency of evidence (relationship between method and problem).

Analysis and Synthesis: Sharpness of analysis and synthesis at least includes: a description of the findings of the work that discusses the work sharply and is accompanied by clear facts, its relationship to previous concepts/theories or the depth of interpretation of the findings, comparing it critically with other people's work, and strengthening/correcting previous findings.

Conclusion: Drawing conclusions can produce new findings that are expressed accurately and in depth. Conclusions must be in accordance with the research objectives. New findings can be in the form of theories, postulates, formulas, rules, methods, models, prototypes, or the equivalent. Conclusions must be supported by sufficient research data.