Call For Papers

1. All papers related to the topic of Smart Cities are eligible for submission, including but not limited to the following topics:

2. Submission Requirements

(1) Papers must be original and previously unpublished, and their content shall conform to the scope of the call for papers.

(2) The conference only accepts full-English manuscripts. The paper is required to be fluent in language with clear logical relationships, use concise expressions, contain charts, graphs and formulas, and include derivation and proof processes. The length of the paper shall be no less than 4 pages, but it is not recommended to exceed 10 pages.

(3) For downloading the conference paper template, please visit the "Download paper template" section under "Submission" on the conference's official website.

(4) The content similarity rate of the submitted manuscript shall be controlled below 20%. Authors shall conduct similarity checks at their own expense through CrossCheck, iThenticate or other similarity check systems; otherwise, the authors shall bear the responsibility themselves for rejection caused by the paper's similarity rate. Papers suspected of plagiarism will not be published and will be posted on the conference homepage.
(5) The full text of each submitted paper will undergo three technical reviews, which include initial review, double-blind peer review (at least three review experts), and final review. The submission will be evaluated on the originality of the content, technical and research content/depth, correctness, relevance to the conference, contribution and readability. 

3. Important Dates
 Deadline for submission of papers:June 15th, 2026

 Notification of acceptance:August 15th, 2026

 Final camera-ready papers due:September 15th, 2026

4. Review Process

Each submitted paper will undergo three rounds of technical review, including preliminary review, double - blind peer review (by at least three review experts), and final review. The specific procedures are as follows:

Preliminary Review (3 working days). The preliminary review is conducted by designated members of the Organizing Committee. The main review contents include: whether the paper's theme is highly consistent with the conference's call for papers; whether the paper's length meets the conference requirements (such as word count and page limit) and whether the structure is complete (including core parts such as abstract, keywords, introduction, main body, conclusion, and references); the repetition rate is detected using authoritative detection tools such as Turnitin, which must be less than 20% (after excluding the quoted part). Papers that pass the preliminary review automatically enter the double - blind peer review stage; papers that fail the preliminary review will receive a rejection notice from the Organizing Committee, with a brief explanation of the reasons for rejection.

Double - blind Peer Review (15 working days). For papers that pass the preliminary review, they are assigned to at least three review experts with relevant research background through a combination of Program Chair assignment and intelligent keyword matching for double-blind peer review. The review criteria include: content originality (whether new viewpoints, new methods, or new discoveries are proposed); depth of technology and research content (scientificity of research methods and sufficiency of data support); correctness of conclusions (rigor of logical reasoning and consistency between conclusions and research content); relevance to the conference theme; academic contribution (theoretical or practical value to the relevant field); text readability (accuracy and fluency of language expression, and clarity of structure). 

Handling of review results: Papers with all review results as "Accept" directly enter the final review stage; For papers with review results as "Minor Revision", authors need to submit the revised paper and revision notes within 7 calendar days. Members of the Organizing Committee will check whether the revisions are in place based on the revision notes to decide whether to accept the paper; For papers with review results as "Major Revision", authors need to submit the revised paper and detailed revision notes within 14 calendar days. The revised paper will be sent back to the original reviewers for re-review (the re-review period does not exceed 5 working days). The original reviewers will decide to accept or reject the paper based on the revision situation, and no further revision opportunities will be given; If there are major differences in review opinions (e.g., 2 experts suggest acceptance and 1 suggests rejection), the Program Chair will organize an additional 1 - 2 review experts for arbitration review, and the next process will be determined based on the arbitration opinions.

Final Review (7 working days). Papers accepted through the double - blind peer review need to undergo the final review by the Program Chair. The final review focuses on: whether the paper meets the overall academic quality requirements of the conference; whether the double - blind review opinions and the author's revision situation are reasonable; whether there are potential academic ethics issues (such as data fraud, improper authorship, etc.). After passing the final review, the conference secretariat will send a formal acceptance notice to the author; papers that fail the final review will be rejected by the Program Chair with an explanation of the reasons.