BMIC 2009 - The 3rd International Symposium on Bio- and Medical Informatics and Cybernetics: BMIC 2009
View: 2168
Website http://www.iiis2009.org/wmsci/ |
Edit Freely
Category BMIC 2009
Deadline: February 25, 2009 | Date: July 10, 2009
Venue/Country: Florida, U.S.A
Updated: 2010-06-04 19:32:22 (GMT+9)
Call For Papers - CFP
The 3rd International Symposium on Bio- and Medical Informatics and Cybernetics: BMIC 2009In the Context ofThe 13th World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics: WMSCI 2009July 10th - 13 th, 2009 ¨C Orlando, Florida, USAhttp://www.iiis2009.org/bmic/Program Committee Chairs: William Lesso and C. Dale ZinnGeneral Chair: Nagib CallaosOrganizing Committee Co-Chairs: Jorge Baralt, Belkis S¨¢nchez and Andr¨¦s TremanteConference¡¯s Major Themes• Bioinformatics: Applications and the Use ofInformatics and Computer Science inBiology.• Bio-Computing. Bio-Informatics• Medical Computing• Biology-inspired Robots and Agents• Computational Genomics• Bio-Complexity• Health Information Systems• Systems Biology• Bioinformatics and Medical Genomics• Computerized Patient Record• Medical Decision Support Systems. MedicalExpert Systems.• Medical informatics: Applications and theUse of Information and CommunicationTechnologies (ICT) by Medical and HealthcarePractitioners.• Healthcare Networks• Imaging Informatics• Online Health Information & PatientEmpowerment Organization Change,Information Needs• Public Health Informatics, Clinical Trials• Biomedical Informatics. Applications andUse of Computers in BiomedicalTechnology and Research• Applications of Artificial-Intelligence andICT technologies in Bioinformatics and BiomedicalInformatics• Cyber-Medicine. E-Health. Tele-health.Tele-Medicine. E-medicine.• Applications of Operations Research andManagement Science in Medicine andHealth Care.• Cyber-Biology• Medical Cybernetics• Biological CyberneticsProgram CommitteeThe Program Committee has about 13 members, whoare complemented by other reviewers. The names,affiliations and countries of the PC¡¯s members as wellas the additional reviewers could be found at theConference¡¯s web site, or more specifically atwww.iiis2009.org/bmic/PCommitte.asp. The ProgramCommittee is mostly formed by 1) the authors of thesessions' best papers of BMIC 2008; 2) its effectiveinvited session organizers who also were co-editors ofthe conference proceedings; and 3) some members ofpast BMIC Conferences, who were also authors ofbest papers. (Those who manifested no interest inparticipating in the Program Committee have beenremoved).Ways of ParticipationParticipation in the conference could be done bymeans of one or several of the following activities:• The submission of a paper/abstract.• The organization of Invited Session(s)• Tutorial proposals• The organization of Focus Symposium.• The reviewing process.• The conference promotion.• Recommending scholars/researchers in order tohave an active participation and/or submit thepapers.• Panel Presentation.• Proposing Organizations/Institutes/Universitiesas Academic/Scientific Co-Sponsors.Kinds of ParticipantsParticipation of both, researchers and practitioners isstrongly encouraged. Papers may be submitted on:research in science and engineering, case studiesdrawn on professional practice and consulting, andposition papers based on large and rich experiencegained through executive/managerial practices anddecision-making. Hence, the Program Committee hasbeen conformed according to the criteria given above.Types of Submissions Accepted1. Papers/Abstracts• Research papersa. in scienceb. in engineering, including systemsanalysis, design, implementation,synthesis, deployment, maintenance,etc.• Review papers• Case studies• Position papers• Reports: technical reports, engineeringreports, reports on a methodologicalapplication, etc.2. Invited SessionsData regarding invited session to be organized bythe submitter (title of the invited session, name ofthe organizer, affiliation, titles of the papersaccepted for the invited session, authors¡¯ names,etc.). More details could be found below or at theconference web site.3. Panel Presentation and/or Round TableProposals. Panel or round table proposals can bemade using the web page related to invitedsessions proposals.4. Focus Symposia (which should include aminimum of 15 papers). Focus symposiaproposals can be made using the web page relatedto invited sessions proposals.5. Tutorial or workshop presentation, which canbe proposed sending an email totutorialmail.wmsci2009.orgDeadlinesFebruary 25th, 2009: Submission of draft papers(2000-5000), extended abstracts (400-2000) andabstracts for-presentation-only (200-500 words)February 25th, 2009: Invited Sessions proposals.Acceptance of invited session proposals will be donein about one week of its proposal via the respectiveconference web form, and final approval will be doneafter the inclusion of at least five papers in therespective sessionMarch 16th, 2009: Notifications of acceptance.May 27th, 2009: Submission of camera-ready or finalversions of the accepted papers.July 10th, 2009: Conference StartsJuly 13th, 2009: Conference EndsSome invited sessions might have a different timetableaccording to its organizer and chair, but in any casethe camera ready deadline should be met.Three Kinds of Reviewing ProcessesDraft papers and abstracts will have three kinds ofreviewing: double-blind, non-blind and participatoryreviewing:1. Each submission will be sent to at least threereviewers, randomly selected, from the ProgramCommittee¡¯s members and from the additionalreviewers, for its double-blind reviewing.2. Draft papers and extended abstracts will alsohave non-blind, open reviewing by means of 1-3reviewers suggested by the submitting authors.The author(s) of each submitted paper/abstractshould nominate at least one or two reviewers(accordingly to the submission option selected),and can nominate a maximum of three reviewersfor the non-blind review of their respectivesubmitted paper/abstract.3. Submissions will also be included in aParticipative Peer-to-Peer Reviewing (PPPR).Consequently, submissions will be posted,without previous screening, in the conferenceweb site in a way that it could be accessed,reviewed, commented and evaluated by theauthors who sent draft papers or abstracts in thesame area or topic. Authors will get a login and apassword in order to have this kind of access.Details related to the Participative Peer-to-PeerReviewing (PPPR), as well as the reasoningsupporting it can be found athttp://www.iiis2009.org/Wmsci/Website/Pptpr.asp?vc=19,Acceptance of a submitted paper will be based on allkinds of reviewing, but the first two (double-blind andnon-blind) will be necessary conditions for draftpapers and extended abstracts.The selection of the best 10%-20% papers, for theirpublication in the Journal of Systemics, Cyberneticsand Informatics (JSCI), will also be done based on thethree kinds of reviewing.Several studies have shown the strength and theweaknesses of double-blind and non-blind methods ofreviewing. Many editors and authors also addressedthis issue, some of whom have concluded that thereviewing should be double blinded and some othersreached the opposite conclusion. David Kaplan, ahighly cited author for example, stated that toovercome the weaknesses of peer-reviewing and to fixit ¡°Review of a manuscript would be solicited fromcolleagues by the authors. The first task of thesereviewers would be to identify revisions that could bemade to improve the manuscript. Second, thereviewers would be responsible for writing anevaluation of the revised work.¡± (Kaplan D., 2005,¡°How to Fix Peer Review¡±, The Scientist, Volume 19,Issue 1, Page 10, Jun. 6. Also inwww.scienceboard.org/community/perspectives.142.htmlSince both of these reviewing methods are oppositeswithout contradiction between them, both methods canbe used in a way as to complement one another,getting their advantages and reducing their respectivedisadvantages. This is the aim of BMIC 2009¡¯sOrganizing Committee while choosing to combineboth of them in the reviewing process of the papersthat are submitted to the conference.A Multi-Methodological Approach forReviewing Submissions sent to a Multi- andInter-Disciplinary ConferenceConsidering the multi- and inter-disciplinary nature ofBMIC 2009 and the fact that there are different kindsof epistemological values, disciplinary rigors,reviewing standards, and conference organizationalmodels, the BMIC 2009's Organizing Committeeconsidered as highly desirable to have different kindsof submissions to the conference with differentmethods of their respective reviewing. Accordingly,submissions of draft papers will be differentiated fromabstracts' submissions. Each kind of submission willhave two different reviewing methods as well.Consequently, authors will have the opportunity tochoose the way of submitting their paper that best fitstheir disciplinary rigor and their organization'srequirements with regards to the conferenceorganizational model. In any kind of submissionauthors should clearly indicate the contributionmade by them.Accordingly, there will be different reviewingmethods, going from the most formal one, to lessformal methods followed by those who conceive theknowledge communication made through conferencesas a more informal process. Consequently, authorswill have different ways of making their submissions,and these ways will be highly related to differentconference organizational models followed byprestigious scholar societies or suggested by highlycited authors.Three kinds of reviewing processes will be applied tosubmission made for their presentation at theconference and their inclusion in the hard copy andCD version of the conference proceedings. These threekinds are: 1) double-blinded reviews; 2) open, nonblindreviews; and 3) participative peer-to-peerreviews by authors who made submissions to the sametopic or area in the conference.The 3 submission options that authors have are thefollowing:A. Full draft papers (2000-5000 words) submittedfor their presentation at the conference and theirinclusion in the conference proceedings, in their hardcopy and CD versions. These kind of submissions willbe reviewed by a Modified Kaplan's Method, wherethe submission's author should suggest at least twoscholars, researchers and/or professionals for theopen, non-blind review of his/her paper. Each paperwill also be sent to at least 3 reviewers for its doubleblindreview as well. Acceptance decisions will bebased on both kinds of reviews: Non-blind anddouble-blind ones.B. Extended abstracts (400-2000 words, not a fullpaper) submitted for their presentation at theconference and their inclusion in the conferenceproceedings, in their hard copy and CD versions.Authors submitting Extended Abstracts shouldsuggest at least one scholar, researcher, or professionalfor the open, non-blind review of his/her abstract.Each extended abstract will also be sent to at leastthree reviewers for its double-blind reviewing as well.Acceptance decisions will be based on both kinds ofreviewing: Non-blind and double-blind ones. "Thesubmission should contain a scholar [or aprofessional] exposition of ideas, techniques, andresults, including motivation and a clearcomparison with related work." (as it is indicatedfor submissions to be made to the Annual IEEESymposia on Foundations of Computer Science:FOCS).C. Abstracts (200-500 words, not a full paper and notmore than 500 words) are considered for their possibleacceptance for presentation only. Authors submittingAbstracts may suggest 1-3 scholars, researchers orprofessionals for open, non-blind reviewing of his/herabstract. Each brief abstract will also be sent to at leastthree reviewers for its double-blind review as well.Acceptance decisions will be based on both kinds ofreviewing: Non-blind and double-blind ones. Thesubmission should be similar to the abstracts orintroductions usually written at the beginning of a fullpaper, containing a scholarly or a professionalexposition of ideas, techniques, and results, includingmotivation and a clear comparison with related work.Acceptance of this kind of abstracts is for presentationonly. Just an abstract will be included in the preconferenceproceedings. Their respective fullpaper will not be published in the pre-conferenceproceedings but may be published in the postconferencevolume of the proceedings if:• Their respective presenters are willing to includethem in the post-conference volume of theproceedings; AND• The full paper is received, according to therequired format, by the respective deadline (about20 days after the conference is over); AND• The chair of the session where the paper waspresented recommends its inclusion in the postconferencevolume of the proceedings,supporting his/her recommendation on theopinions of the session¡¯s attendees.Acceptance policyThe acceptance policy which is usually applied to thesubmissions made to BMIC, the symposia organizedin its context, the collocated Conferences and otherconferences organized by the International Institute ofInformatics and Systemics (IIIS), is oriented by:A. The majority rule, when there is no agreementamong the reviewers with regards to acceptanceor non-acceptance, of a given submission.B. The non-acceptance of the submission when thereis agreement among its reviewers for notaccepting it.C. Acceptance of the paper when in doubt (a drawor a tie among the opinions of the reviewers, forexample).The reasoning that is supporting this acceptance policyis based on very well established facts:• There usually is a low level agreement amongreviewers• A significant probability of refusing high qualitypapers when the acceptance policy is oriented insuch a way as to just accept those papers with nodisagreement for their respective acceptance.• The possible plagiarism (of some non-ethicalreviewer) of the content of non-accepted papers.Details regarding the reasoning supporting thisacceptance policy are given in the conference website.Submitted papers/abstracts will be sent to reviewers.The best 10% of the papers will also be published inthe Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics(JSCI). Acceptance decisions regarding paperspresentation at the conference, and their respectiveinclusion in the conference¡¯s proceedings, will bebased on their content review and/or on the respectiveauthor¡¯s CV. Invited papers will not be reviewed andtheir acceptance decision will be based on the topicand the respective author¡¯s CV. Some of these invitedpapers, if chosen by the session chair as the best paperof the session, might also be published by JSCIJournal, because the 30% of sessions best papers willalso be published in the journal. All accepted papers,which should not exceed six single-spaced typedpages, will be published by means of paper andelectronic proceedings.Reviewing of papers submitted to invitedsession organizersOrganizers of invited sessions are autonomous withregards to the reviewing method to be used in thereviewing process of the papers to be submitted totheir respective sessions. They can use any of themethods described above, or some combination ofthem.In some cases, like it is the case of Invited Papers, theCVs of the authors will also support the decisionregarding the acceptance, or non-acceptance, of therespective paper.Organizers of the best invited sessions or focussymposia will co-edit the respective proceedingsvolume, the CD version of the proceedings and mightbe invited to be invited editors or co-editors of theJSCI Journal issue where their session or symposiapapers will be published. Multiple author books, orJSCI journal issues, might be published by IIIS, basedon the best-invited sessions, the best focus symposiaor the best mini-conferences, and the topic of thepapers.Reviewers not meeting the reviewing deadlineIf the reviewers selected for reviewing a givenpaper/abstract do not make their respective reviewsbefore the papers/abstracts acceptance deadline, theselection committee may inform the respective authorabout this fact.Reviewing of papers and abstract other thanresearch full papersThe reviewing process of abstracts, case studies,position papers, reports, white papers, panelpresentations and round table proposals will be basedon the relevance of the topic, its potential forinterdisciplinary communications, its educationalvalue and/or its analogical thinking potential.Papers to be included in the conferenceproceedingsAccepted papers that have at least one of their authorswith a confirmed registration status in the conference,will be included in both versions of the conferenceproceedings (hardcopy and CD). Papers received afterthe respective deadline may be included in the postconferenceproceedings volume. Any error that resultsin the non-inclusion of a paper that should have beenincluded in the proceedings will be correctedincluding such a paper in the post-conferenceproceedings volume.Paper to be included, later, in the JournalJSCIEach accepted paper or presentation is candidate forbeing a best paper of its respective session and,consequently, it is candidate for a second reviewingprocess to be made by the reviewers of the Journal ofSystemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (JSCI), for itspossible inclusion among the best 10%-20% paperspresented at the conference which will be selected andpublished in the JSCI, after doing possiblemodifications (in content/format) and extensions as toadequate them to a journal publication.Submission of Draft Papers and AbstractsAbstracts or draft papers should be submittedtaking into account the following format:1. Each submission should be related to at leastone of the major themes, or the special symposia,given above.2. Each submission should have a title.3. Abstracts for-presentation-only should have 200 to500 words, extended abstracts should have 400 to2000 words and draft papers should have 2000 to5000 words, in English.4. Author(s) with names, addresses, telephone and faxnumbers, and e-mail addresses should be included.5. Each author making a submission shouldnecessarily suggest at least one or two (accordinglyto the submission option selected) and a maximumof three reviewers for the open review of thesubmitted extended abstract or paper draft,according to the acceptation policy stated above.Abstracts or draft papers should be sent via theconference web sitehttp://www.iiis2009.org/bmic/Submission.asp, fillingthe respective form and uploading the respective paperor abstract. If the conference web site is not accessiblefor you, you can also make your submission by e-mail,attaching it to the following e-mail address:bmicmail.iiis2009.orgConference FeesThe registration fee for IIIS' members(http://www.iiis.org/iiis) will be $590 before theirCamera Ready deadline and $640 after their CameraReady deadline. Additional $50 applies for nonmembersof IIIS.Full-time students at academic institutions will have adiscount of $100 off the registration fee indicatedabove. This discount applies only to the registrationfee. To qualify for the discounted fee, students mustprovide, via fax or postal mail, an official certificationissued by their university or institution verifying theyare full-time students and a copy of their valid StudentID card. Full-time students that register at theconference must have both forms of verification withthem when they arrive at the registration desk.Authors of papers accepted for their respectivepresentation at BMIC 2009, or any of the symposiaorganized in its context or any of the collocatedconferences, may apply for a complimentary, free IIISmembership athttp://www.iiis2009.org/Wmsci/Website/IIISMembers.asp?vc=19, after getting the acceptance e-mail relatedto the presentation of their paper and before makingtheir registration in the conference, so they canregister with the reduced fee.Each registration fee entitles the publication andpresentation of one paper of up to 6 pages. Theregistered author may include one additional paper (ofup to 6 pages and authored by him/her) at an extracharge of $300. The additional paper must be authoredand presented by the registered author.If two or more authors of the same paper attend theconference, each of them must pay his/her respectiveregistration fee in full.There is a limit of 6 pages for each paper in theProceedings. At most 2 additional pages can beincluded, as long as the registered author pays the feeof US$ 75.00 per extra page.This fee will include exclusively:• A CD-ROM version of the proceedings• One volume of the hard copy version of theconference proceedings. (If you are an author, youwill receive the volume in which your paper waspublished).• Coffee breaks• Welcome ReceptionAny other expenses must be afforded by theparticipants.The registration fee does not include any postconferenceservices. There will be additional shippingand handling costs to be paid by those registeredauthors who, for unforeseen reasons, cannot attendBMIC 2009 and will ask us to send them theproceedings after the conference. Any other postconferenceadministrative requirements will becharged at a rate of US$20 per staff hour required toelaborate such a requirement, with a minimum ofUS$10. Post-conference requirements will have theirown deadline, which, in no case, will be more thanfour (4) months counted from the last day of theconference.Invited SessionsInvited sessions¡¯ organizers are autonomous in thepromotion of their respective session as well as incollecting, reviewing and selecting the papers to bepresented at their respective sessions.An invited session organizer has a similar role to theinvited editor in a journal, i.e. he or she is invited toidentify and look for high quality papers, to review thepapers of his, or her, session, to select the reviewersthat will help him, or her, and to decide which papershe/she wants to be presented at respective invitedsession.The invitation is an academic, not a financial one,because, unfortunately, we have no financial sponsorand the conference should self-finance itself.Consequently, we cannot make any financialcommitment.Invited sessions and symposia organizers with the bestperformance will be co-editors of the proceedingsvolume where their session or symposia paper wereincluded.Chairs of invited sessions will select the best paperpresented at their session. Sessions¡¯ best papers willbe reviewed by reviewers of the Journal of Systemics,Cybernetics, and Informatics (JSCI) in order to selectthe best 30% of them for their respective publicationsin the Journal.Best invited sessions and symposia organizers arecandidates for invited editors or co-editors of the JSCIJournal special issue related to their field of researchinterest.Details with regards to the role of invited sessionorganizers and to suggested steps that they mightmake in organizing their respective sessions are givenin the conference web site.Guidelines for Reviewers (and authors)The Golden Rule ¡°Treat others as you would like tobe treated¡±, apply very well for the most general andessential guidelines for reviewers. Siegelman (1988)adapted this golden rule of the Ethics of Reciprocity inwhat might be called the Golden Rule of Reviewing.He stated ¡°Referee manuscript as you would like tohave your own papers treated¡± (Siegelman, advice toauthors. Radiology 1988; 166:278-280; in Weller,2002, Editorial Peer Review, its Strength andWeaknesses, Medford, New Jersey)."The Golden Rule" is an essential moral principlefound in almost all major religious and cultures. It hasbeen conceived as the most essential basis for themodern concept of human right. Principalphilosophers and religious figures have stated it indifferent ways. Atwww.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm, forexample, versions of the Golden Rule in 21 worldreligious are quoted. Analogously we might conceiveSiegelman¡¯s Reviewing Golden Rule as an essentialrule that can be applied to virtually all reviewingprocesses and methods in spite of their high diversityand the variety of their ends and means.To be more specific, with regards to some guidelinesfor reviewers, would depend on the objectives soughtby the reviewing process and on its inherentlimitations and restrictions. Different editorialobjectives, for example, would probably originatedifferent guidelines. Different disciplines withpossibly different epistemological values would alsoprobably require different guidelines. Journalreviewing might have different guidelines to thereviewing required by conferences presentations orproceedings publications. Scientific research paperswould probably have different guidelines than thoserecommended for papers of case studies, work inprogress, experience-based reflections, industrialinnovations, analogical thinking, etc.One way of dealing with the inherent diversity ofdisciplines and kinds of papers in a multi-disciplinarycontext is to ask the reviewers (beside theirconstructive feedback oriented to improve the paper,their reasoned recommendation for accepting/rejectingthe paper) to rate the paper according different criteriaestablished by the respective editor or the respectiveconference¡¯s chair or organizers. The weights of thesecriteria would depend on the kind of article submittedand on the nature and the objectives of thecorresponding Journal or the conference.Consequently, in multi-, inter-, and trans-disciplinarycontexts, especially in those oriented to forumsintegrated by the academic, industrial and publicsectors, we recommend the reviewers to rate thearticle being reviewed according the followingcriteria:1. Originality: Not known or experienced before. Atechnique or a method not used before. Has thisor similar work been previously reported? Arethe problems and/or approaches in the papercompletely new?2. Novelty: According this criterion, it is notnecessary for the paper to develop newtechniques, or to generate new knowledge, but itshould, at least, apply, or combine, them in afresh and novel way or shed some new light ontheir applicability in a certain domain.3. Innovation: A new product, process or servicebased on new or known technologies, methods ormethodologies. Known technologies andtechniques might be combined to generate newproduct or service with potential users in themarket. What defines an innovation is a new kindof possible users of a product or a service, notnecessarily new knowledge, new techniques, newtechnologies, new methods, or new applications.Innovation is related to new uses or new markets.4. Relevance: Importance, usefulness, and/orapplicability of the ideas, methods and/ortechniques described in the paper.5. Appropriateness: Suitability, agreeableness,compatibility, congruity, and adequacy of thepaper to the areas and topics of the journal or theconference. Would the article perhaps better bepresented at another conference?6. Significance: Importance and noteworthiness ofthe ideas, methods and techniques used and/ordescribed in the article. The problem approachedin the article should be interesting and natural,and not just be chosen by the authors because itcan be attacked by their methods. What it ispresented in the article is not just obvious andtrivial ideas.7. Quality: Scientific, technical, and/ormethodological soundness of the article.Correctness of results, proofs and/or reflections.Inclusion in the articles of details that allowchecking the correctness of the results or citationsof articles where can be found the proof or partsof it.8. Presentation: Adequate organization of thearticle and the language used in it, as to make itscontent clear, easily readable and understandable.Clarity in what has been achieved by the authorof the article. Even technical papers on a narrowtopic should be written such that non-experts cancomprehend the main contribution of the paperand the methods employed. The paper shouldn'tjust be a litany of deep but obscure theorems. Theinformation of the paper should be available tothe reader with a minimum of effort.Audiovisual EquipmentThe audiovisual equipment provided for mostmeetings will be a screen, LCD Projector, and alaptop. Any other equipment, if needed, will have tobe supplied by the presenter.Conference ContactsPhone: +58 (212) 232-7062Fax: + (407) 656-3516Conference Secretariatbmic-secmail.wmsci2009.orgMore details can be found at the Conference webpage: http://www.iiis2009.org/bmic/. Answers tospecific questions can also be requested by e-mail
Keywords: Accepted papers list. Acceptance Rate. EI Compendex. Engineering Index. ISTP index. ISI index. Impact Factor.
Disclaimer: ourGlocal is an open academical resource system, which anyone can edit or update. Usually, journal information updated by us, journal managers or others. So the information is old or wrong now. Specially, impact factor is changing every year. Even it was correct when updated, it may have been changed now. So please go to Thomson Reuters to confirm latest value about Journal impact factor.