Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 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 : Double blind • Conference submission management system : Easy Chair • Number of submissions received: 144 • Number of submissions sent for review: 144 • Number of submissions accepted: 55 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 38.19% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 48 • Any additional info on review process : Reviewers from premier organizations such as IITs, NITs, Central Universities and State Universities. • Contact person for queries: Dr.D.Haritha, Convenor, CHSN-2020 (icchsn2020@gmail.com) PEER REVIEW POLICY Adopted by CHSN-2020 Reviewers were asked to consider the following key points related to scientific content, quality and presentation. Technical Criteria • Formal Structure of the review • Language • Scientific merit: Originality and Topicality, Materials and Methods • Clarity of expression; communication of ideas; readability and discussion • References Quality Criteria • Originality: Novelty of the proposed approaches/methods • Results: Clarity of the illustration • Repetition: Have significant parts of the manuscript already been published? • Length: Is the content of the work of sufficient scientific interest to justify its length? Presentation Criteria • Title: Is it adequate and appropriate for the content of the article? • Abstract: Does it contain the essential information of the article? Is it complete? Is it suitable for inclusion by itself in an abstracting service? • Diagrams, figures, tables and captions: Are they essential and clear? • Text and mathematics: Are they brief but still clear? If you recommend shortening, please suggest what should be omitted. • Conclusion: Does the paper contain a carefully written conclusion, summarizing what has been learned and why it is interesting and useful? The conference coordinators reviewed the submitted papers relevance to the conference topics and checked whether the papers meet the IOP format requirements. The independent reviewers evaluated the submitted papers according to the following criteria as the relevance to meet the study, novelty of work, quality and scientific knowledge, paper structure for IOP format and adequate references etc. Based on the reviewers report, the authors are suggested to revise the submitted manuscript for further reviews.