Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind • Conference submission management system : all papers have been submitted to the e-mail address of the conference; all corresponding authors received a confirmation e-mail concerning their submission Number of submissions received : -118 papers presented in conference -76 submissions received • Number of submissions sent for review: 76 • Number of submissions accepted: 70 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 92% • Average number of reviews per paper: 1 • Total number of reviewers involved: 19 Any additional info on review process : Review process is divided into two parts: first part begin in the moment of the presentation of papers in the conference. After the presentation of the papers in the conference, the coordinators of each session select the papers which can be submitted in full form to be considered for publication. Only the papers announced in the program of the conference and presented orally in the conference can be taken into consideration for publication. All submissions of full papers are object of the second part of the review process. In the second part of the review process, we check if the full papers received were not published elsewhere. For this purpose, we use a plagiarism program. All papers which are suspected of plagiarism are automatically rejected. The papers which are not suspected of plagiarism have been submitted for peer review and have been analyzed in: a) Scientific merit b) Originality c) Motivation d) Standard of English e) Length f) Title g) Abstract h) Diagrams, figures, tables and captions i) Conclusion j) Bibliography All these points have been evaluated on five levels: a) Poor (1 point): serious weaknesses b) Fair (2 points): significant weaknesses c) Good (3 points): no weakness and some improvements would be necessary d) Very Good (4 points): certain improvements are still possible e) Excellent (5 points): any shortcomings are minor Finally, each paper received a score. Papers having at least 31 points have been accepted to be published in the volume of Conference Proceedings. Contact person for queries : Ludovic Dan LEMLE University Politehnica Timisoara Department of Electrical Engineering and Industrial Informatics dan.lemle@fih.upt.ro