RMCI 2009 - The 6th International Symposium on Risk Management and Cyber-Informatics: RMCI 2009

Website http://www.iiis2009.org/rmci/ | Edit Freely

Category RMCI 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

In the Context of

The 13th World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics: WMSCI 2009

July 10th - 13 th, 2009 ¨C Orlando, Florida, USA

http://www.iiis2009.org/rmci/

Honorary Presidents of Past Conferences:

Bela Banathy, Stafford Beer, George Klir, Karl Pribram, Paul Jensen and Gheorghe Benga.

Program Committee Chair: Michael Savoie

General Chairs: C. Dale Zinn and Nagib Callaos (WMSCI)

Organizing Committee Co-Chairs: Jorge Baralt, Belkis S¨¢nchez and Andr¨¦s Tremante

Conference¡¯s Major Themes

• Risk Management

• Risk Management in Informatics and Cybernetics

• Applying Informatics and Cybernetics in Risk

Management

• Applications of Risk Management and Cyber-

Informatics

Program Committee

The Program Committee has about 20 members, who

are complemented by about 70 reviewers, from about

38 countries. The names, affiliations and countries of

the PC¡¯s members as well as the additional reviewers

could be found at the Conference¡¯s web site, or more

specifically at www.iiis2009.org/rmci/PCommitte.asp.

The Program Committee is mostly formed by 1) the

authors of the sessions' best papers of RMCI 2008; 2)

its effective invited session organizers who also were

co-editors of the conference proceedings; and 3) some

members of past RMCI Conferences, who were also

authors of best papers. (Those who manifested no

interest in participating in the Program Committee

have been removed).

Ways of Participation

Participation in the conference could be done by

means 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 to

have an active participation and/or submit the

papers.

• Panel Presentation.

• Proposing Organizations/Institutes/Universities

as Academic/Scientific Co-Sponsors.

Kinds of Participants

Participation of both, researchers and practitioners is

strongly encouraged. Papers may be submitted on:

research in science and engineering, case studies

drawn on professional practice and consulting, and

position papers based on large and rich experience

gained through executive/managerial practices and

decision-making. Hence, the Program Committee has

been conformed according to the criteria given above.

Types of Submissions Accepted

1. Papers/Abstracts

• Research papers

a. in science

b. in engineering, including systems

analysis, design, implementation,

synthesis, deployment, maintenance,

etc.

• Review papers

• Case studies

• Position papers

• Reports: technical reports, engineering

reports, reports on a methodological

application, etc.

2. Invited Sessions

Data regarding invited session to be organized by

the submitter (title of the invited session, name of

the organizer, affiliation, titles of the papers

accepted for the invited session, authors¡¯ names,

etc.). More details could be found below or at the

conference web site.

3. Panel Presentation and/or Round Table

Proposals. Panel or round table proposals can be

made using the web page related to invited

sessions proposals.

4. Focus Symposia (which should include a

minimum of 15 papers). Focus symposia

proposals can be made using the web page related

to invited sessions proposals.

5. Tutorial or workshop presentation, which can

be proposed sending an email to

tutorialmail.wmsci2009.org

Deadlines

February 25th, 2009: Submission of draft papers

(2000-5000), extended abstracts (400-2000) and

abstracts for-presentation-only (200-500 words)

February 25th, 2009: Invited Sessions proposals.

Acceptance of invited session proposals will be done

in about one week of its proposal via the respective

conference web form, and final approval will be done

after the inclusion of at least five papers in the

respective session

March 16th, 2009: Notifications of acceptance.

May 27th, 2009: Submission of camera-ready or final

versions of the accepted papers.

July 10th, 2009: Conference Starts

July 13th, 2009: Conference Ends

Some invited sessions might have a different timetable

according to its organizer and chair, but in any case

the camera ready deadline should be met.

Three Kinds of Reviewing Processes

Draft papers and abstracts will have three kinds of

reviewing: double-blind, non-blind and participatory

reviewing:

1. Each submission will be sent to at least three

reviewers, randomly selected, from the Program

Committee¡¯s members and from the additional

reviewers, for its double-blind reviewing.

2. Draft papers and extended abstracts will also

have non-blind, open reviewing by means of 1-3

reviewers suggested by the submitting authors.

The author(s) of each submitted paper/abstract

should nominate at least one or two reviewers

(accordingly to the submission option selected),

and can nominate a maximum of three reviewers

for the non-blind review of their respective

submitted paper/abstract.

3. Submissions will also be included in a

Participative Peer-to-Peer Reviewing (PPPR).

Consequently, submissions will be posted,

without previous screening, in the conference

web site in a way that it could be accessed,

reviewed, commented and evaluated by the

authors who sent draft papers or abstracts in the

same area or topic. Authors will get a login and a

password in order to have this kind of access.

Details related to the Participative Peer-to-Peer

Reviewing (PPPR), as well as the reasoning

supporting it can be found at

http://www.iiis2009.org/Wmsci/Website/

Pptpr.asp?vc=8,

Acceptance of a submitted paper will be based on all

kinds of reviewing, but the first two (double-blind and

non-blind) will be necessary conditions for draft

papers and extended abstracts.

The selection of the best 10%-20% papers, for their

publication in the Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics

and Informatics (JSCI), will also be done based on the

three kinds of reviewing.

Several studies have shown the strength and the

weaknesses of double-blind and non-blind methods of

reviewing. Many editors and authors also addressed

this issue, some of whom have concluded that the

reviewing should be double blinded and some others

reached the opposite conclusion. David Kaplan, a

highly cited author for example, stated that to

overcome the weaknesses of peer-reviewing and to fix

it ¡°Review of a manuscript would be solicited from

colleagues by the authors. The first task of these

reviewers would be to identify revisions that could be

made to improve the manuscript. Second, the

reviewers would be responsible for writing an

evaluation of the revised work.¡± (Kaplan D., 2005,

¡°How to Fix Peer Review¡±, The Scientist, Volume 19,

Issue 1, Page 10, Jun. 6. Also in

www.scienceboard.org/community/perspectives.142.h

tml

Since both of these reviewing methods are opposites

without contradiction between them, both methods can

be used in a way as to complement one another,

getting their advantages and reducing their respective

disadvantages. This is the aim of RMCI 2009¡¯s

Organizing Committee while choosing to combine

both of them in the reviewing process of the papers

that are submitted to the conference.

A Multi-Methodological Approach for

Reviewing Submissions sent to a Multi- and

Inter-Disciplinary Conference

Considering the multi- and inter-disciplinary nature of

RMCI 2009 and the fact that there are different kinds

of epistemological values, disciplinary rigors,

reviewing standards, and conference organizational

models, the RMCI 2009's Organizing Committee

considered as highly desirable to have different kinds

of submissions to the conference with different

methods of their respective reviewing. Accordingly,

submissions of draft papers will be differentiated from

abstracts' submissions. Each kind of submission will

have two different reviewing methods as well.

Consequently, authors will have the opportunity to

choose the way of submitting their paper that best fits

their disciplinary rigor and their organization's

requirements with regards to the conference

organizational model. In any kind of submission

authors should clearly indicate the contribution

made by them.

Accordingly, there will be different reviewing

methods, going from the most formal one, to less

formal methods followed by those who conceive the

knowledge communication made through conferences

as a more informal process. Consequently, authors

will have different ways of making their submissions,

and these ways will be highly related to different

conference organizational models followed by

prestigious scholar societies or suggested by highly

cited authors.

Three kinds of reviewing processes will be applied to

submission made for their presentation at the

conference and their inclusion in the hard copy and

CD version of the conference proceedings. These three

kinds are: 1) double-blinded reviews; 2) open, nonblind

reviews; and 3) participative peer-to-peer

reviews by authors who made submissions to the same

topic or area in the conference.

The 3 submission options that authors have are the

following:

A. Full draft papers (2000-5000 words) submitted

for their presentation at the conference and their

inclusion in the conference proceedings, in their hard

copy and CD versions. These kind of submissions will

be reviewed by a Modified Kaplan's Method, where

the submission's author should suggest at least two

scholars, researchers and/or professionals for the

open, non-blind review of his/her paper. Each paper

will also be sent to at least 3 reviewers for its doubleblind

review as well. Acceptance decisions will be

based on both kinds of reviews: Non-blind and

double-blind ones.

B. Extended abstracts (400-2000 words, not a full

paper) submitted for their presentation at the

conference and their inclusion in the conference

proceedings, in their hard copy and CD versions.

Authors submitting Extended Abstracts should

suggest at least one scholar, researcher, or professional

for the open, non-blind review of his/her abstract.

Each extended abstract will also be sent to at least

three reviewers for its double-blind reviewing as well.

Acceptance decisions will be based on both kinds of

reviewing: Non-blind and double-blind ones. "The

submission should contain a scholar [or a

professional] exposition of ideas, techniques, and

results, including motivation and a clear

comparison with related work." (as it is indicated

for submissions to be made to the Annual IEEE

Symposia on Foundations of Computer Science:

FOCS).

C. Abstracts (200-500 words, not a full paper and not

more than 500 words) are considered for their possible

acceptance for presentation only. Authors submitting

Abstracts may suggest 1-3 scholars, researchers or

professionals for open, non-blind reviewing of his/her

abstract. Each brief abstract will also be sent to at least

three reviewers for its double-blind review as well.

Acceptance decisions will be based on both kinds of

reviewing: Non-blind and double-blind ones. The

submission should be similar to the abstracts or

introductions usually written at the beginning of a full

paper, containing a scholarly or a professional

exposition of ideas, techniques, and results, including

motivation and a clear comparison with related work.

Acceptance of this kind of abstracts is for presentation

only. Just an abstract will be included in the preconference

proceedings. Their respective full

paper will not be published in the pre-conference

proceedings but may be published in the postconference

volume of the proceedings if:

• Their respective presenters are willing to

include them in the post-conference volume

of the proceedings; AND

• The full paper is received, according to the

required format, by the respective deadline

(about 20 days after the conference is over);

AND

• The chair of the session where the paper was

presented recommends its inclusion in the

post-conference volume of the proceedings,

supporting his/her recommendation on the

opinions of the session¡¯s attendees.

Acceptance policy

The acceptance policy which is usually applied to the

submissions made to RMCI, the symposia organized

in its context, the collocated Conferences and other

conferences organized by the International Institute of

Informatics and Systemics (IIIS), is oriented by:

A. The majority rule, when there is no agreement

among the reviewers with regards to acceptance

or non-acceptance, of a given submission.

B. The non-acceptance of the submission when there

is agreement among its reviewers for not

accepting it.

C. Acceptance of the paper when in doubt (a draw

or a tie among the opinions of the reviewers, for

example).

The reasoning that is supporting this acceptance policy

is based on very well established facts:

• There usually is a low level agreement among

reviewers

• A significant probability of refusing high quality

papers when the acceptance policy is oriented in

such a way as to just accept those papers with no

disagreement for their respective acceptance.

• The possible plagiarism (of some non-ethical

reviewer) of the content of non-accepted papers.

Details regarding the reasoning supporting this

acceptance policy are given in the conference web

site.

Submitted papers/abstracts will be sent to reviewers.

The best 10% of the papers will also be published in

the Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics

(JSCI). Acceptance decisions regarding papers

presentation at the conference, and their respective

inclusion in the conference¡¯s proceedings, will be

based on their content review and/or on the respective

author¡¯s CV. Invited papers will not be reviewed and

their acceptance decision will be based on the topic

and the respective author¡¯s CV. Some of these invited

papers, if chosen by the session chair as the best paper

of the session, might also be published by JSCI

Journal, because the 30% of sessions best papers will

also be published in the journal. All accepted papers,

which should not exceed six single-spaced typed

pages, will be published by means of paper and

electronic proceedings.

Reviewing of papers submitted to invited

session organizers

Organizers of invited sessions are autonomous with

regards to the reviewing method to be used in the

reviewing process of the papers to be submitted to

their respective sessions. They can use any of the

methods described above, or some combination of

them.

In some cases, like it is the case of Invited Papers, the

CVs of the authors will also support the decision

regarding the acceptance, or non-acceptance, of the

respective paper.

Organizers of the best invited sessions or focus

symposia will co-edit the respective proceedings

volume, the CD version of the proceedings and might

be invited to be invited editors or co-editors of the

JSCI Journal issue where their session or symposia

papers will be published. Multiple author books, or

JSCI journal issues, might be published by IIIS, based

on the best-invited sessions, the best focus symposia

or the best mini-conferences, and the topic of the

papers.

Reviewers not meeting the reviewing deadline

If the reviewers selected for reviewing a given

paper/abstract do not make their respective reviews

before the papers/abstracts acceptance deadline, the

selection committee may inform the respective author

about this fact.

Reviewing of papers and abstract other than

research full papers

The reviewing process of abstracts, case studies,

position papers, reports, white papers, panel

presentations and round table proposals will be based

on the relevance of the topic, its potential for

interdisciplinary communications, its educational

value and/or its analogical thinking potential.

Papers to be included in the conference

proceedings

Accepted papers that have at least one of their authors

with a confirmed registration status in the conference,

will be included in both versions of the conference

proceedings (hardcopy and CD). Papers received after

the respective deadline may be included in the postconference

proceedings volume. Any error that results

in the non-inclusion of a paper that should have been

included in the proceedings will be corrected

including such a paper in the post-conference

proceedings volume.

Paper to be included, later, in the Journal

JSCI

Each accepted paper or presentation is candidate for

being a best paper of its respective session and,

consequently, it is candidate for a second reviewing

process to be made by the reviewers of the Journal of

Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (JSCI), for its

possible inclusion among the best 10%-20% papers

presented at the conference which will be selected and

published in the JSCI, after doing possible

modifications (in content/format) and extensions as to

adequate them to a journal publication.

Submission of Draft Papers and Abstracts

Abstracts or draft papers should be submitted taking

into account the following format:

1. Each submission should be related to at least one 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 to

500 words, extended abstracts should have 400 to

2000 words and draft papers should have 2000 to

5000 words, in English.

4. Author(s) with names, addresses, telephone and fax

numbers, and e-mail addresses should be included.

5. Each author making a submission should

necessarily suggest at least one or two (accordingly

to the submission option selected) and a maximum

of three reviewers for the open review of the

submitted extended abstract or paper draft,

according to the acceptation policy stated above.

Abstracts or draft papers should be sent via the

conference web site

http://www.iiis2009.org/rmci/Submission.asp, filling

the respective form and uploading the respective paper

or abstract. If the conference web site is not accessible

for you, you can also make your submission by e-mail,

attaching it to the following e-mail address:

rmcimail.iiis2009.org

Conference Fees

The registration fee for IIIS' members

(http://www.iiis.org/iiis) will be $590 before their

Camera Ready deadline and $640 after their Camera

Ready deadline. Additional $50 applies for nonmembers

of IIIS.

Full-time students at academic institutions will have a

discount of $100 off the registration fee indicated

above. This discount applies only to the registration

fee. To qualify for the discounted fee, students must

provide, via fax or postal mail, an official certification

issued by their university or institution verifying they

are full-time students and a copy of their valid Student

ID card. Full-time students that register at the

conference must have both forms of verification with

them when they arrive at the registration desk.

Authors of papers accepted for their respective

presentation at RMCI 2009, or any of the symposia

organized in its context or any of the collocated

conferences, may apply for a complimentary, free IIIS

membership at

http://www.iiis2009.org/Wmsci/Website/IIISMembers

.asp?vc=8, after getting the acceptance e-mail related

to the presentation of their paper and before making

their registration in the conference, so they can

register with the reduced fee.

Each registration fee entitles the publication and

presentation of one paper of up to 6 pages. The

registered author may include one additional paper (of

up to 6 pages and authored by him/her) at an extra

charge of $300. The additional paper must be authored

and presented by the registered author.

If two or more authors of the same paper attend the

conference, each of them must pay his/her respective

registration fee in full.

There is a limit of 6 pages for each paper in the

Proceedings. At most 2 additional pages can be

included, as long as the registered author pays the fee

of 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 the

conference proceedings. (If you are an author, you

will receive the volume in which your paper was

published).

• Coffee breaks

• Welcome Reception

Any other expenses must be afforded by the

participants.

The registration fee does not include any postconference

services. There will be additional shipping

and handling costs to be paid by those registered

authors who, for unforeseen reasons, cannot attend

RMCI 2009 and will ask us to send them the

proceedings after the conference. Any other postconference

administrative requirements will be

charged at a rate of US$20 per staff hour required to

elaborate such a requirement, with a minimum of

US$10. Post-conference requirements will have their

own deadline, which, in no case, will be more than

four (4) months counted from the last day of the

conference.

Invited Sessions

Invited sessions¡¯ organizers are autonomous in the

promotion of their respective session as well as in

collecting, reviewing and selecting the papers to be

presented at their respective sessions.

An invited session organizer has a similar role to the

invited editor in a journal, i.e. he or she is invited to

identify and look for high quality papers, to review the

papers of his, or her, session, to select the reviewers

that will help him, or her, and to decide which papers

he/she wants to be presented at respective invited

session.

The invitation is an academic, not a financial one,

because, unfortunately, we have no financial sponsor

and the conference should self-finance itself.

Consequently, we cannot make any financial

commitment.

Invited sessions and symposia organizers with the best

performance will be co-editors of the proceedings

volume where their session or symposia paper were

included.

Chairs of invited sessions will select the best paper

presented at their session. Sessions¡¯ best papers will

be reviewed by reviewers of the Journal of Systemics,

Cybernetics, and Informatics (JSCI) in order to select

the best 30% of them for their respective publications

in the Journal.

Best invited sessions and symposia organizers are

candidates for invited editors or co-editors of the JSCI

Journal special issue related to their field of research

interest.

Details with regards to the role of invited session

organizers and to suggested steps that they might

make in organizing their respective sessions are given

in the conference web site.

Guidelines for Reviewers (and authors)

The Golden Rule ¡°Treat others as you would like to

be treated¡±, apply very well for the most general and

essential guidelines for reviewers. Siegelman (1988)

adapted this golden rule of the Ethics of Reciprocity in

what might be called the Golden Rule of Reviewing.

He stated ¡°Referee manuscript as you would like to

have your own papers treated¡± (Siegelman, advice to

authors. Radiology 1988; 166:278-280; in Weller,

2002, Editorial Peer Review, its Strength and

Weaknesses, Medford, New Jersey).

"The Golden Rule" is an essential moral principle

found in almost all major religious and cultures. It has

been conceived as the most essential basis for the

modern concept of human right. Principal

philosophers and religious figures have stated it in

different ways. At

www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm, for

example, versions of the Golden Rule in 21 world

religious are quoted. Analogously we might conceive

Siegelman¡¯s Reviewing Golden Rule as an essential

rule that can be applied to virtually all reviewing

processes and methods in spite of their high diversity

and the variety of their ends and means.

To be more specific, with regards to some guidelines

for reviewers, would depend on the objectives sought

by the reviewing process and on its inherent

limitations and restrictions. Different editorial

objectives, for example, would probably originate

different guidelines. Different disciplines with

possibly different epistemological values would also

probably require different guidelines. Journal

reviewing might have different guidelines to the

reviewing required by conferences presentations or

proceedings publications. Scientific research papers

would probably have different guidelines than those

recommended for papers of case studies, work in

progress, experience-based reflections, industrial

innovations, analogical thinking, etc.

One way of dealing with the inherent diversity of

disciplines and kinds of papers in a multi-disciplinary

context is to ask the reviewers (beside their

constructive feedback oriented to improve the paper,

their reasoned recommendation for accepting/rejecting

the paper) to rate the paper according different criteria

established by the respective editor or the respective

conference¡¯s chair or organizers. The weights of these

criteria would depend on the kind of article submitted

and on the nature and the objectives of the

corresponding Journal or the conference.

Consequently, in multi-, inter-, and trans-disciplinary

contexts, especially in those oriented to forums

integrated by the academic, industrial and public

sectors, we recommend the reviewers to rate the

article being reviewed according the following

criteria:

1. Originality: Not known or experienced before. A

technique or a method not used before. Has this

or similar work been previously reported? Are

the problems and/or approaches in the paper

completely new?

2. Novelty: According this criterion, it is not

necessary for the paper to develop new

techniques, or to generate new knowledge, but it

should, at least, apply, or combine, them in a

fresh and novel way or shed some new light on

their applicability in a certain domain.

3. Innovation: A new product, process or service

based on new or known technologies, methods or

methodologies. Known technologies and

techniques might be combined to generate new

product or service with potential users in the

market. What defines an innovation is a new kind

of possible users of a product or a service, not

necessarily new knowledge, new techniques, new

technologies, new methods, or new applications.

Innovation is related to new uses or new markets.

4. Relevance: Importance, usefulness, and/or

applicability of the ideas, methods and/or

techniques described in the paper.

5. Appropriateness: Suitability, agreeableness,

compatibility, congruity, and adequacy of the

paper to the areas and topics of the journal or the

conference. Would the article perhaps better be

presented at another conference?

6. Significance: Importance and noteworthiness of

the ideas, methods and techniques used and/or

described in the article. The problem approached

in the article should be interesting and natural,

and not just be chosen by the authors because it

can be attacked by their methods. What it is

presented in the article is not just obvious and

trivial ideas.

7. Quality: Scientific, technical, and/or

methodological soundness of the article.

Correctness of results, proofs and/or reflections.

Inclusion in the articles of details that allow

checking the correctness of the results or citations

of articles where can be found the proof or parts

of it.

8. Presentation: Adequate organization of the

article and the language used in it, as to make its

content clear, easily readable and understandable.

Clarity in what has been achieved by the author

of the article. Even technical papers on a narrow

topic should be written such that non-experts can

comprehend the main contribution of the paper

and the methods employed. The paper shouldn't

just be a litany of deep but obscure theorems. The

information of the paper should be available to

the reader with a minimum of effort.

Audiovisual Equipment

The audiovisual equipment provided for most

meetings will be a screen, LCD Projector, and a

laptop. Any other equipment, if needed, will have to

be supplied by the presenter.

Conference Contacts

Phone: +58 (212) 232-7062

Fax: + (407) 656-3516

Conference Secretariat rmci-secmail.wmsci2009.org

More details can be found at the Conference web

page: http://www.iiis2009.org/rmci/. Answers to

specific questions can also be requested by e-mail