The 6th Summer School on Cyber Physical Systems and Internet of Things (SS-CPS&IoT’2025) - Proceedings Published!
The Proceedings of the SS-CPS&IoT'2025 are now available at: MECONET PUBS, ZENODO, DOI.
Editorial Policies
General Criteria for Publication
Competing Interests, Funding, and Ethics
Data and Code Availability Policy
Corrections, Retractions, and Withdrawal Policy
Appeals, Complaints, and Misconduct Handling
Expected Behavior and Editorial Conduct
General Criteria for Publication
WiPiEC publishes original, high-quality research in the field of embedded computing, with a special focus on cyber-physical systems, Internet of Things (IoT), and artificial intelligence (AI). Submissions are assessed for:
- Novelty and relevance to the journal's scope
- Clarity of presentation and logical structure
- Soundness of methodology
- Potential impact on research and practice
Works in progress are welcomed, including early-stage research, prototype systems, and conceptual frameworks, as long as the core ideas are clearly communicated and of interest to the community.
Article Types
WiPiEC accepts the following types of contributions:
- Full papers. Original research or works in progress presenting new ideas, prototypes, systems, or experimental results.
- Short papers. Original research or works in progress presenting new ideas, prototypes, systems, or experimental result summarized in short form
- Technical Notes – Brief reports of novel techniques or design ideas in both hardware and software, observations, or incremental improvements.
Inside the text of the papers or on web page the type of work should be clearly indicated.
Peer Review Policy
All submissions are initially assessed by an Editor or Handling Editor, who decides whether or not the article is suitable for peer review. Submissions considered suitable for peer review are assigned to two or more independent experts.
Peer review is the academic quality control process used to assess a manuscript before publication. It is based on experts/scientists close to the field of the publication, called referees, who assess at the publication draft according to the below criteria. The process can be iterative and aims to improve the quality of the manuscript.
To be accepted for publication, articles must satisfy the following criteria:
- Descriptions and results reported have not been published in another journal, book or conference procedure;
- The article is presented in an intelligible fashion and is written in standard English without jargon;
- The article adheres to our openness criteria;
- Where applicable, the research meets all standards for the ethics of experimentation and research integrity. The appropriate standards must be referred to in the publication with explanation why this particular standard was chosen; Conclusions are presented in an appropriate fashion and are supported by the data;
- Experiments, statistics, and other analyses are performed correctly and are described in sufficient detail alongside all the supporting code and data (respectively licenses as Free Software and Open Data).
Members of the editorial team/board are permitted to submit their own papers to the journal. In cases where an author is associated with the journal, they will be removed from all editorial tasks for that paper and another member of the team will be assigned responsibility for overseeing peer review. A competing interest must also be declared within the submission and any resulting publication.
All manuscripts submitted to WiPiEC undergo a single-blind peer review process, meaning that authors are known to reviewers throughout the review process. Reviewers are not known to authors during the review process unless they choose to sign their reviews. The process includes:
- Editorial screening for scope and format
- Assignment to at least two qualified reviewers
- Independent evaluation and recommendations
- Editorial decision (accept, revise, or reject)
Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, respectful, and unbiased feedback. Average review timelines are 4–6 weeks.
Reviewers are asked to provide comment on the below topics and guidelines:
- Content: Is the article original, relevant, and within the journal’s scope? Does it demonstrate a solid understanding of the topic and use appropriate methodology and evidence? Are sources properly used and cited?
- Structure & Argument: Is the abstract accurate and concise? Is the paper logically organized, with clear argument flow and a conclusion that reflects the main findings?
- Figures/Tables: Do visual elements effectively support the argument and data? Are they well-formatted and relevant?
- Formatting: Does the manuscript follow the journal's style guide and referencing format?
- Language: Is the paper clearly written, grammatically correct, and free from unnecessary jargon?
The reviewer template should have on-line (within submission) system and off-line form (being download from journal web site). Editors determine the content of the form.
All papers are subject of strong review process, managed by associate editor or other responsible persons. The idea of the review process is to get the most competent review in the shortest possible time, for a maximum of 4 weeks. The review process of short papers or technical notes can be shorten.
Authorship
Authorship must be based on substantial contributions to:
- Concept and design
- Data acquisition or analysis
- Drafting or critically revising the manuscript
All listed authors must approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission. Guest, honorary, or ghost authorship is strictly prohibited. Authorship statements will be part of author declaration form, which need to be submitted together with paper.
Competing Interests, Funding, and Ethics
All authors, reviewers, and editors must declare competing interests, including:
- Financial relationships (grants, employment, consultancies)
- Personal or professional affiliations
Funding sources must be disclosed in the manuscript. For studies involving human participants, animals, or sensitive data, appropriate ethical approval and informed consent must be documented. Those statements will be part of author declaration form, which need to be submitted together with paper.
Data and Code Availability Policy
WiPiEC encourages transparency and reproducibility. Authors should:
- Share datasets, code, and supplementary materials via trusted repositories
- Provide persistent identifiers (e.g., DOIs)
- Link datasets in the manuscript where applicable
Recommended repositories include GitHub, Zenodo, and MECOnet's institutional repository, while the others are also approved, as e.g., arXiv, HAL. For full requirements, see the Archiving and Repositories Policy.
Preprint Policy
WiPiEC accepts submissions that have been previously posted on recognized preprint servers (e.g., arXiv, HAL, Zenodo). Authors must disclose any prior preprint publication in the submission cover letter. Preprint directories of authors' institutions are also welcome. More about preprint possibilities can be found at Archiving and Repositories.
The author retains copyright to the preprint and developed works from it, and is permitted to submit to the journal.
The author declares that a preprint is available within the cover letter presented during submission. This must include a link to the location of the preprint.
Should the submission be published, the authors are expected to update the information associated with the preprint version to show that a final version has been published in the journal, including the DOI linking directly to the publication.
Licensing and Copyright
All published articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. This permits:
- Sharing and reuse with proper attribution
- Commercial and derivative use
Authors retain full copyright of their work and grant WiPiEC the right to publish and disseminate the article. More about Licensing and Copyright can be found at Licensing and Copyright.
Corrections, Retractions, and Withdrawal Policy
WiPiEC is committed to maintaining the scholarly record. Policies include:
- Corrections for honest errors or minor issues
- Retractions for ethical breaches or major errors (following COPE guidelines)
- Withdrawals must be formally requested by authors before acceptance; post-review withdrawals are discouraged
All changes to published content will be clearly marked and timestamped.
Appeals, Complaints, and Misconduct Handling
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a clear justification. Complaints regarding ethical misconduct, authorship disputes, or peer review bias are investigated by the editorial board in accordance with COPE principles.
Should an individual wish to submit an appeal, complaint or raise an issue of potential misconduct regarding the journal or its content, they should contact that editor in chief and/or the publisher to explain their concerns.
Expected Behaviour and Editorial Conduct
WiPiEC fosters a professional, respectful, and inclusive environment. Harassment, discrimination, or abusive behavior toward authors, reviewers, or editorial staff will not be tolerated.
All participants are expected to:
- Communicate respectfully
- Avoid personal criticism
- Comply with deadlines and ethical standards
The journal does not tolerate abusive behaviour or correspondence towards its staff, academic editors, authors, or reviewers. Any person engaged with the journal who resorts to abusive behaviour or correspondence will have their contribution immediately withdrawn and future engagement with the journal will be at the discretion of the editor and/or publisher.
ORCID Policy
Authors are encouraged to provide their ORCID iD during submission. ORCID ensures proper author identification and linking of research outputs.
Use of AI and Automated Tools
If generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) are used during manuscript preparation, authors must:
- Clearly disclose their use in the acknowledgments or methods section
- Maintain full responsibility for the content
AI tools must not be listed as authors.