Alternate authors presentations will be included in the ION GNSS+ 2021 platform.
One of the traditions of the ION GNSS+ meeting is to recognize the best paper presentation delivered in each session with a Best Presentation Award. The session’s co-chairs jointly select the recipient.
In 2021, presentations will be judged based on the virtual presentation. In-person presenters wishing to be considered for a best presentation award are required to upload a video presentation. In-person authors that do not wish to be considered for the award are not required to upload a video.
Please use the criteria of the following aspects when evaluating each of your session’s presentations for this prestigious honor:
Forms will be emailed for your use.
Winners of the Best Presentation Award will be posted online at the end of the conference, noted on the ION GNSS+ Proceedings, and will be printed in the Fall Issue of the ION Newsletter. Best Presentation Award winners receive a certificate by mail two to three weeks after the meeting.
Session Chairs in the Research Tracks shall be responsible for the peer review of manuscripts through the ION’s online Abstract Management Portal (AMP). You can perform the peer review yourself or delegate it to another, but you are responsible to manage this process.
Each paper will be required to pass two reviews to receive a “peer reviewed” designation in the ION GNSS+ proceedings. ION GNSS+ peer review criteria should not be as high as for a journal paper. The majority of the papers will fall into the “endorse paper as is” with some requiring “minor non-technical revisions” (typically English edits). Only in rare occasions should you not be able to endorse a paper. Non-endorsed papers will still be included in the conference proceedings; they simply will not carry a “peer reviewed” designation. Exceptional papers will be endorsed/identified for the ION Journal, NAVIGATION. An optional “comment” box will be included under each category, where you may elect to insert optional notes/guidance to the author. Note that by definition if you respond “yes” to each question the paper will have met the established standard of peer review. If you respond “no” to any of the peer review questions, you will be required to include an explanation.
A paper will only go through the peer review process once. The conference’s Peer Review/Publications Committee will resolve any conflicts between pass/fail. A paper will not be re-reviewed after it has been revised. Authors may revise papers based on comments and suggestions made by reviewers before the final papers are submitted for publication in the proceedings; but only those papers that pass peer review the first time will be designated as peer reviewed in the proceedings.
Questions or concerns you have regarding peer review or completing the peer review process should be referred to a member of the Publications/Peer Review Committee:
Please contact Miriam Lewis (email)
For Attendees Technical Program Registration Hotel Travel and Visas Special Events COVID-19 Information Exhibits Submit Kepler Nomination For Authors and Chairs Abstract Management Author Resource Center Session Chair Resources Panel Moderator Resources Student Paper Awards Smartphone Decimeter Challenge For Exhibitors Exhibitor Resource Center Marketing Resources Other Years Future Meetings Past Meetings