Many social, societal and organizational problems, in the information age, are interrelated and need to be solved jointly by means of multidisciplinary projects, interdisciplinary communications and/or trans-disciplinary concepts and methodologies.

Informatics, Cybernetics and Cyber-Technologies (ICCT) are, by definition and by nature, transversal to many disciplines and, as such, are special means for the multi-, inter-, and trans-disciplinary approaches required.

ICCT are helping in the solutions of an increasing social, societal and organizational problems, but they are also generating new kind of problems and raising unfamiliar questions. The processes of answering these questions and finding possible solutions to these kinds of problems require as much as of scientific/engineering approaches, as of conceptual/reflexive studies.

Both, analogical and logical thinking are also required, in different complementary studies, as well as combined in the same one. In this context logical thinking without the analogical one would be sterile, and analogical thinking without the logical one would be dangerous for being prone to hidden errors and mistakes.

In the context of this framework, the basic purpose of the Organizing Committee of SOIC 2025 is to a provide a forum for disciplinary and interdisciplinary communications, where researchers (in Social and Natural Sciences, as well as in Engineering), intellectuals, policy/decision makers and Consultants would share the results of their research, studies and thoughts, with regards to societies and private/public organizations in the context of the Information Age.

Accordingly, the Organizing and the Program Committees of SOIC 2025 invite researchers, academics, consultants and policy/decision makers to submit research papers as well as position papers based on intellectual reflection, conceptual studies or real life experience. The content of the papers to be submitted may be oriented to the presentation of solutions, results and answers as well as to problems and reflexive questioning.

Organizational, Reviewing, and Selection of Best Papers Policies

Technical Keynote Speakers

Technical keynote speakers will be selected from early submissions because this selection requires an additional evaluation according to the quality of the paper, assessed by its reviewers, the authors' CV and the paper's topic.

Virtual Pre- and Post-Conference Sessions

Face-to-face sessions of all events will have associated virtual pre- and post-conference sessions where registered participants can comment each paper in a forum associated to it. Registered participant at any event will have a password to access any virtual session of any collocated event.

Reviewing Process

All Submitted papers/abstracts will go through three reviewing processes: (1) double-blind (at least three reviewers), (2) non-blind, and (3) participative peer reviews. Final acceptance depends of the three kinds of reviews but a paper should be recommended by non-blind reviewers AND blind reviewers in order to be accepted for presentation at the conference and to be included in the respective conference proceedings. A recommendation to accept made by non-blind reviewers is a necessary condition, but it is not a sufficient one. A submission, to be accepted, should also have a majority of its double-blind reviewers recommending its acceptance. This double necessary conditions generate a more reliable and rigorous reviewing than a those reviewing methods based on just one of the indicated methods, or just on the traditional double-blind reviewing. More details regarding this issue can be found at https://www.iiis.org/iiis/PeerReviewing.asp.

The three kinds of reviews mentioned above will support the selection process of those papers/abstracts that will be accepted for their presentation at the conference, as well as those to be selected for their publication in JSCI Journal. Details regarding the Acceptance Policy can be found at https://www.iiis.org/iiis/AcceptancePolicy.asp.

Authors of accepted papers who registered in the conference can have access to the evaluations and possible feedback provided by the reviewers who recommended the acceptance of their papers/abstracts, so they can accordingly improve the final version of their papers. Non-registered authors will not have access to the reviews of their respective submissions.

Virtual Participation

Submissions for Face-to-Face or for Virtual Participation are both accepted. Both kinds of submissions will have the same reviewing process and the accepted papers will be included in the same proceedings.
Pre-Conference and Post-conference Virtual sessions (via electronic forums) will be held for each session included in the conference program, so that sessions papers can be read before the conference, and authors presenting at the same session can interact three days before and during the conference, as well as up to three weeks after the conference is over. Authors can also participate in peer-to-peer reviewing in virtual sessions.

Invited Sessions Organizers

Registration fees of an effective invited session organizers will be waived according to the policy described in the web page (click on 'Invited Session', then on 'Benefits for the Organizers of Invited Sessions'), where you can get information about the ten benefits for an invited session organizer. To propose the organization of an Invited Session, please visit the conference website, and go to the menu option “Invited Sessions” and then to the menu sub-option “Invited Sessions Organizers.”

Best Papers

Authors of the best 25%-30% of the papers presented at the conference (included those virtually presented) will be invited to adapt their papers for their publication in the Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics.

One best paper of each session included in the program will be selected by the respective session’s co-chairs after consulting with the session’s audience. Invited Sessions organizers will select the best paper of the session they organized. If there is a tie in a given session, the paper that will be selected as the best session’s paper will be the one which have had the highest quantitative evaluations average according to its double-blind and non-blind reviews.

The selection process of the best 25%-30%, to be also published in the Journal, will be based on the sessions' best papers and the quantitative evaluation average made by its anonymous and non-anonymous reviewers. The later will be applied to papers which acceptance was based on reviews made to draft papers. Reviews of abstracts and extended abstracts will not be valid for selecting best papers according to the quantitative evaluation of the respective submissions.