All manuscripts are subject to blind peer review by competent reviewers in the relevant field and are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. The reviewers identity remain anonymous throughout the process. The review process is as below:

1. The conference secretary performs a preliminary review to confirm if the papers meet basic publishing standard or not, and then papers will go through a similarity check by Crosscheck, a professional checking tool for plagiarism. 2. Submitted papers that don't pass preliminary review or are suspected as plagiarism will be rejected directly. Furthermore, a encourage re-submission or don't encourage submission decision may be given according to the overall situation of the paper. 3. Submitted papers that pass the preliminary review will be sent to the program chair who is in charge of the peer review process. He appoints at least two suitable conference committee members as reviewers for each paper whose areas of expertise have to match with the topics of the papers. 4. In case no suitable reviewers can be drawn from the conference committee, the conference secretary will invite external reviewers to help with the review who are experts in related fields and volunteer to help. 5. Normally, each paper should require at least two individual review reports. The conference secretary must make proper arrangement and keep an eye on the reviewers feedback. If review reports are not returned within stipulated time, the conference secretary should find new reviewers in time to fill up. 6. The conference chair will make decisions about submissions, which include: Strongly accept, accept, marginally accept, reject. The conference chair remains the right to make final decision, who can also seek help from other conference committee members. 7. The conference secretary then will inform the authors, and papers which need revisions will be required to be sent back within stipulated time, and only revised papers that pass the second review will be accepted.