Přejít k obsahu

Instructions for authors

The conference languages are Czech, Slovak and English.


The recommended length is 200 - 250 words. Abstracts of conference contributions will be included in proceedings which will be published electronically. Once you register, you should upload your abstract via an online form at the conference website Link. Please contact conference secretariat in case you are interested in submitting more abstracts than one.


MS Word 97 or higher (we cannot accept papers in PDF format), page size: A4, margins: 40 mm (top), 25 mm (left and right) and 27 mm (bottom), single-line spacing, no more than 6 pages, including figures; the file should be no larger than 20 MB (if not feasible, please contact the conference organisers’ office), the mandatory template is available for download HERE. Please upload your papers to the conference system. Full instructions on preparing your paper, can be found on the IOP Conference Series website.

Programme committee reserves the right to change the classification of the paper (lectures/posters) or refuse it.

After the conference, submitted papers will be peer-reviewed. The accepted ones will be published into journal IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineerign (MSE) and sent to Web of Science for evaluation and indexing as well.

Criteria for inclusion of a paper into the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering:

  • scientific paper focused on the topic of the session,
  • paper processed according to the template,
  • paid conference fee,
  • only those contributions which are to be presented at the conference will be considered for publication

IOP Conference Series operates a publishing licence, under which authors retain copyright of their papers and no longer need to sign and submit copyright assignment forms. Any author who wishes to publish in IOP Conference Series must agree to the terms of the licence and by submitting a paper for publication it is assumed all authors of the paper agree, in full, to the terms of the licence. The licence terms and conditions are available online.
As part of the peer review, the author may be requested to correct errors. A reviewer will request the author to correct their paper no more than twice. If the author fails to submit the corrected paper or the corrected paper fails to meet the relevant criteria, the conference programme committee has the right to reject the paper.


The normal presentation time is 15 minutes + 5 minutes for questions and answers. The presentation format should be PowerPoint (MS Office 2000 or higher); the recommended font size: 40 points, the presentation body text: approx. 25 points, but no fewer than 15 points. The file size should be no more than 50 MB. The presentation should be clearly arranged and easy to read, so that the text, figures, graphs, tables and equations are readable even from a greater distance.


Posters will be displayed in the form of e-posters on the conference website. E-posters can be viewed throughout the conference at www.ping.zcu.cz. They can be prepared using, for instance, MS PowerPoint or publishing tools (e.g. Adobe InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop, Quark Xpress and others). You may use this e-poster template. The file format is PDF (300 dpi, no less than 100 dpi).

Review procedure

Step 1.

The authors submit the manuscript before the conference via the online system of the conference website (http://www.ping.zcu.cz/en ---> Submit a contribution, abstract).

 Step 2.

The responsible editor starts the first plagiarism check with iThenticate. The editor evaluates the similarity and if it will be higher than 20%, the paper will be sent back to the author for revision. Next, the formalities will be checked: whether the article thematically corresponds to the conference, whether the correct template is used and whether the required number of pages is observed, etc. If the formalities are met, the responsible editor appoints two reviewers (experts on the topic) to revise the article. Reviewers are given two weeks to prepare the report and send the report to the editor. The opinion is prepared in a pre-sent form with questions targeted at certain areas. The form includes the following sections:


The editor nominates another reviewer if the reviewers' comments contradict each other (1 reviewer accepted the article and 1 reviewer rejected it). 

 Step 3.

The editor-in-chief decides whether the reviewer's comment is relevant or not. If the comment is relevant, the reviewers' comments and the editor's comment will be sent to the author for revision of the article. If the authors' comments are not evaluated as relevant, the editor can judge the article himself or request another revision from another reviewer.

 Step 4.

Authors are required to revise their contributions according to the points listed in the reviewers' comments and the editor's comments. Authors are given two weeks to review their papers and send them back through the conference web system.

 Step 5.

The editor then evaluates whether the new version of the article includes all the points mentioned by the reviewers. If the reviewer requests a major revision of the article and a second revision, the article is sent to the original reviewer for approval. If the editor approves a revised version of the manuscript, the paper will be accepted for publication. If not, the editor sends the edited document to the author for further revision.

 Step 6.

If the revised version does not match the points raised by the reviewer and the editor, the editor will send the author an email rejecting the article.