{"id":80,"date":"2020-01-01T03:25:04","date_gmt":"2020-01-01T03:25:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/?page_id=80"},"modified":"2020-05-20T12:45:58","modified_gmt":"2020-05-20T11:45:58","slug":"peer-review-acceptance-policy","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<\/i>\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tPeer Review\/Acceptance Policy\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by our Conference. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Transport Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. \n\nInitial manuscript evaluation The Chair TPC first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Conference. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. \n\nType of Peer Review Transport Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. \n\nHow the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated. \n\nReferee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: \u2013 Is original \u2013 Is methodologically sound \u2013 Follows appropriate ethical guidelines \u2013 Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions \u2013 Correctly references previous relevant work.\n\nLanguage correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. \n\nHow long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee\u2019s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee\u2019s report has thoroughly convinced the Publication Chair \/ Chair TPC , decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee\u2019s report. The Chair decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. \n\nFinal report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. \n\nEditor\u2019s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.\nBecoming a referee for Transport Policy If you are not currently a referee for Transport Policy but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Transport Policy include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Transport Policy as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations.\nWe follow the IEEE norms for the Review process<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an … <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-80","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\nPeer Review\/Acceptance Policy - %<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"IEEE inocon 2020 accept only orginal Research paper with excellent technical contribution. The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by our Conference. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Transport Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Initial manuscript evaluation The Chair TPC first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Conference. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Type of Peer Review Transport Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. How the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: \u2013 Is original \u2013 Is methodologically sound \u2013 Follows appropriate ethical guidelines \u2013 Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions \u2013 Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee\u2019s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee\u2019s report has thoroughly convinced the Publication Chair \/ Chair TPC , decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee\u2019s report. The Chair decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. Editor\u2019s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a referee for Transport Policy If you are not currently a referee for Transport Policy but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Transport Policy include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Transport Policy as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations. We follow the IEEE norms for the Review process\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy - %\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"IEEE inocon 2020 accept only orginal Research paper with excellent technical contribution. The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by our Conference. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Transport Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Initial manuscript evaluation The Chair TPC first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Conference. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Type of Peer Review Transport Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. How the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: \u2013 Is original \u2013 Is methodologically sound \u2013 Follows appropriate ethical guidelines \u2013 Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions \u2013 Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee\u2019s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee\u2019s report has thoroughly convinced the Publication Chair \/ Chair TPC , decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee\u2019s report. The Chair decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. Editor\u2019s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a referee for Transport Policy If you are not currently a referee for Transport Policy but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Transport Policy include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Transport Policy as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations. We follow the IEEE norms for the Review process\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVACEMENT IN COMMUNICATION AND COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-05-20T11:45:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/\",\"name\":\"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy - %\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-01-01T03:25:04+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-05-20T11:45:58+00:00\",\"description\":\"IEEE inocon 2020 accept only orginal Research paper with excellent technical contribution. The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by our Conference. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Transport Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Initial manuscript evaluation The Chair TPC first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Conference. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Type of Peer Review Transport Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. How the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: \u2013 Is original \u2013 Is methodologically sound \u2013 Follows appropriate ethical guidelines \u2013 Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions \u2013 Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee\u2019s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee\u2019s report has thoroughly convinced the Publication Chair \/ Chair TPC , decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee\u2019s report. The Chair decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. Editor\u2019s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a referee for Transport Policy If you are not currently a referee for Transport Policy but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Transport Policy include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Transport Policy as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations. We follow the IEEE norms for the Review process\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/#website\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/\",\"name\":\"INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVACEMENT IN COMMUNICATION AND COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY\",\"description\":\"INOACC\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy - %","description":"IEEE inocon 2020 accept only orginal Research paper with excellent technical contribution. The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by our Conference. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Transport Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Initial manuscript evaluation The Chair TPC first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Conference. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Type of Peer Review Transport Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. How the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: \u2013 Is original \u2013 Is methodologically sound \u2013 Follows appropriate ethical guidelines \u2013 Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions \u2013 Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee\u2019s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee\u2019s report has thoroughly convinced the Publication Chair \/ Chair TPC , decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee\u2019s report. The Chair decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. Editor\u2019s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a referee for Transport Policy If you are not currently a referee for Transport Policy but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Transport Policy include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Transport Policy as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations. We follow the IEEE norms for the Review process","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy - %","og_description":"IEEE inocon 2020 accept only orginal Research paper with excellent technical contribution. The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by our Conference. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Transport Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Initial manuscript evaluation The Chair TPC first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Conference. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Type of Peer Review Transport Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. How the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: \u2013 Is original \u2013 Is methodologically sound \u2013 Follows appropriate ethical guidelines \u2013 Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions \u2013 Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee\u2019s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee\u2019s report has thoroughly convinced the Publication Chair \/ Chair TPC , decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee\u2019s report. The Chair decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. Editor\u2019s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a referee for Transport Policy If you are not currently a referee for Transport Policy but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Transport Policy include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Transport Policy as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations. We follow the IEEE norms for the Review process","og_url":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/","og_site_name":"INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVACEMENT IN COMMUNICATION AND COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY","article_modified_time":"2020-05-20T11:45:58+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/","url":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/","name":"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy - %","isPartOf":{"@id":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-01-01T03:25:04+00:00","dateModified":"2020-05-20T11:45:58+00:00","description":"IEEE inocon 2020 accept only orginal Research paper with excellent technical contribution. The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by our Conference. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Transport Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Initial manuscript evaluation The Chair TPC first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Conference. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Type of Peer Review Transport Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. How the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: \u2013 Is original \u2013 Is methodologically sound \u2013 Follows appropriate ethical guidelines \u2013 Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions \u2013 Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee\u2019s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee\u2019s report has thoroughly convinced the Publication Chair \/ Chair TPC , decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee\u2019s report. The Chair decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. Editor\u2019s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a referee for Transport Policy If you are not currently a referee for Transport Policy but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Transport Policy include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Transport Policy as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations. We follow the IEEE norms for the Review process","breadcrumb":{"@id":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/peer-review-acceptance-policy\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Peer Review\/Acceptance Policy"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/#website","url":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/","name":"INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVACEMENT IN COMMUNICATION AND COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY","description":"INOACC","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/80","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=80"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/80\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":246,"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/80\/revisions\/246"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/inoconf.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}