All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. Therefore, please provide the following information:
• Type of peer review: Single-blind/Double-blind/Triple-blind/Open/Other (please describe)
Each paper was blind peer-reviewed by two reviewers. Members of the Conference scientific committee served as reviewers.
• Conference submission management system:
EasyChair platform (easychair.org) was used for the management of the Conference papers.
• Number of submissions received:
Initially the Conference organiser received 86 abstracts of scientific papers.
• Number of submissions sent for review:
82 submitted reports were sent for review.
• Number of submissions accepted:
50 papers were accepted.
• Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted/Number of Submissions Received X 100):
(48/86) x 100 = 56 %
• Average number of reviews per paper:
Two.
• Total number of reviewers involved:
Thirteen reviewers from 3 countries:
1. Alfredas Laurinavičius, Dr.sc.ing., Vilnius Gedemina Technical University, Lithuania
2. Andrus Aavik, Dr.sc.ing., Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia
3. Artu Ellmann, Dr.sc.ing., Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia
4. Atis Zarins, Dr.sc.ing., Riga Technical University, Latvia
5. Audrius Vaitkus, Dr.sc.ing., Vilnius Gedemino Technical University, Lithuania
6. Dago Antov, Dr.sc.ing., Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia
7. Daiva Žilionienė, Dr.sc.ing., Vilnius Gedemino Technical University, Lithuania
8. Donatas Čygas, Dr.sc.ing., Vilnius Gedemino Technical University, Lithuania
9. Juris Smirnovs, Dr.sc.ing., Riga Technical University, Latvia
10. Viktoras Vorobjovas, Dr.sc.ing., Vilnius Gedemino Technical University, Lithuania
11. Viktors Haritonovs, Dr.sc.ing., Riga Technical University, Latvia
12. Ainars Paeglitis, Dr.sc.ing. Riga Technical University, Latvia
13. Janis Barbars, M Eng., "Latvian State Roads", Latvia
• Any additional info on review process:
Summaries/abstracts of the submitted papers were also reviewed in preliminary evaluation.
During evaluation the following factors were considered:
1. Whether thehe author is familiar with the existing state of research,
2. Whether the topic is relevant to the scope of 30IBRC and corresponds to one of the seven main themes of the Conference,
3. Whether the report his is a new and original contribution,
4. Whether the title is appropriate,
5. Whether thehe abstract and keywords are adequate,
6. Whether the presentation of material is logical and technically correct,
7. Whether the interpretations and conclusions are sound and justified by the results,
8. Whether the writing style/English is clear and understandable,
9. Whether the paper is of the right length,
10. And finally, whether the references are adequate.
After the evaluaton the following recommendations were expressed towards each report :
- Acceptable without any changes
- Acceptable with modifications
- Unacceptable
• Contact person for queries:
Martins Dambergs martins.dambergs@lvceli.lv
Please submit this form along with the rest of your files on the submission date written in your publishing agreement.
The information you provide will be published as part of your proceedings.