Authors » Selection Criteria

This year, we will have all prospective authors of Transducers 2021 submit manuscript styled papers (4 pages in length) that will be directly placed in the technical digest. Please follow the template provided.

Some papers are better suited for poster presentation, others for oral presentation. Authors may indicate a preference for poster presentation on the paper submission form, otherwise, all abstracts will be considered for both oral and poster sessions. The Technical Program Committees will select papers according to how well they address the following questions:
  1. What are the significant new accomplishments? State unambiguously whether devices have been fabricated, experimental results obtained, and provide details.
  2. What is new in relation to previous work? Provide references to relevant literature (including publications by the author's group).
  3. What is the goal or motivation of the work?
  4. What is the impact or significance of the results to the transducers field?
Authors should not submit work that has already been presented at another conference or that has been published in other literature. In the text and through reference to the literature, authors should clearly delineate how the submitted work differs from other recent work by the same research group, or by other groups.

Reasons Abstracts are not accepted:
  • Was not submitted to the Transducers 2021 Conference Website by deadline to send to the reviewers
  • Prior Publication
  • Didn't show application was working
  • Didn't document data, details or measurement or had some relevant information missing
  • Data too generic or not enough device or process characterization
  • Results incomplete and inconclusive and/or no verification
  • Unclear concept of device, or what is "new" from your previous work or others
  • Poor images and unclear pictures or no picture of device
  • Submission acting as a commercial instead of displaying research
  • Insufficient technical impact
  • Wrong meeting for this topic - better suited for a different meeting
  • Didn't reference previous known work or publications