The  Best Paper Award consists  of a certificate of Best Paper Award to all co-authors of the winning paper and an admission ticket to any NACCS 2011 meeting (Tunisia, New York, etc.), or its monetary equivalent in US dollars,  for the First Author of the paper.  The Best Paper Award shall be presented by the Chairperson of NACCS 2010 Best Paper Review Committee (BPAC) at the NACCS 2010 Conference  Closing Ceremony on Wed April 23, 2010.

All papers published in the Proceedings of NACCS 2010 shall be eligible for the Best Paper Award.

Best Paper Selection Committee

All members of NACCS 2010 who are not an author or co-author of a nominated paper may be invited, by Prof. Abdelfetteh Belghith,  to participate in the selection of the Best Paper Award.
 A minimum of 5 reviewers must participate in the selection process.

 If five members of NACCS 2010 are not available, the Chairperson of the Best Paper Award Committee shall extend an invitation to other persons to participate in the selection process. This invitation shall be extended (in the following order) to:

-Members of the NACCS Scientific Committee (or Program Committee)
-Members of the NACCS Organizing Committee
-Other suitably qualified persons at the discretion of the Chairperson of the BPAC.

The Chairman of the BPAC is to ensure that a minimum of five persons participate in the selection process for each award.

Selection Process

All personnel invited to participate in the selection process are required to review all papers nominated in the award category. If a person does not review all papers nominated in the award category, all reviews performed by that person for that award are void. Papers are to be reviewed in accordance with the selection criteria described below. The score allocated to each paper by each reviewer shall be multiplied by the weighting and then added. The highest scoring paper shall be recommended for the award. Where two (2) or more papers within an award category receive the same total score, the paper which has the highest score in the highest weighted criteria shall be recommended for the particular award. Where this is unable to separate equally scored papers, a joint award shall be recommended.

Governance

The Best Paper Award recommendations shall be presented by the BPAC Chairman to the Chair of NACCS 2010 for endorsement. The Chairman of NACCS 2010 can seek details / clarifications of the selection process as he sees fit. Once satisfied with the selection, the Chairman of NACCS 2010 shall endorse the recommended awards. The Chairperson of NACCS 2010 can only endorse the recommendations presented by the BPAC.

Papers will be reviewed and judged on content and writing style as described below. Each paper shall be given a score of 0 – 10 (where 0 is the lowest and 10 is the highest score) against each criterion.

Criterion 1: C1: Content (Weighting: W1= 3). The content or core idea of the paper should be powerful, relevant, valid and innovative.

Criterion 2: C2: Topic Relevance and Importance (Weighting: W2= 5). The thought, idea, concept or intent of the paper is the most important criterion of excellence. That is, the topic must be relevant and important to its target audience. The paper must present or support a finding or conclusion with significant potential value to that audience. One measure is the degree to which the ideas or results presented can be reused or built upon by others. Another measure (particularly for case studies and project success stories) is the paper's value to the simulation community as an example of best practice simulation technologies, methods, capabilities, experience and culture.

Criterion 3: C3: Technical and Logical Validity (Weighting W3= 3). Validity refers to the strength and intellectual quality of the idea, how supporting rationale are expressed, and the soundness of the thought processes in reaching conclusions. Validity does not refer to the idea itself, but rather to the value of the idea and how that value is developed or demonstrated in the paper. The author(s) should provide a convincing rationale supporting the paper's claims and conclusions. Hence, discussion and development of the idea must be based on accepted principles of logic and technical inquiry.

Technical discussions should be grounded in the scientific method or other accepted technical theory. Deviations and proposed extensions to these should be clearly stated, supported and rationalized. Non-technical subjects should reference experts or experiential background in support of the argument. Evaluations must be based on solid reasoning and logic.

Criterion 4: C4: Innovation (Weighting  W4=3). Innovation refers to the contribution of significant new information or insight. The paper need not be on a totally new or original subject (although it can be). However, the paper should, as suggested by the U.S. Patent and Trade Office, be unique, non-obvious and useful. The paper could include support for, questioning of, or rejection of an already published idea, approach or theory. It could be a different way of looking at a familiar subject, such as an historical event, or even a spoof that provides new insight into the subject at hand. The degree of innovation in approach, ideas, conclusions and insight are at the core of this criterion.

Criterion 5: C5: Writing Style (Weighting W5=1). Writing style refers to the manner in which the topic is presented rather than the topic itself. The principal elements of good writing style are accuracy, clarity, simplicity and readability. An engaging, accurate and evocative writing style is the essence of all good technical or non-technical literature. Papers that, although technically excellent, do not also reflect excellence in writing style may not be reviewed favourably. The writing style of each paper should be appropriate to the particular audience, media and field for which the paper is written.

Criterion 6: C6: Accuracy (Weighting W6= 1). Specific language must be used to lend authority. Vague or undefined terms should be avoided. For every field there are precise and accurate terms that will capture any idea or concept.

Criterion 7: C7: Clarity (Weighting W7=2). Clarity requires an unambiguous and logical organization of the paper. Strong transitions and concise language enable the reader to easily follow the author's train of thought. Trivia, exhaustive detail and stilted language should be avoided. Proper emphasis should be placed on the paper's primary idea. This idea should be concisely supported and not overshadowed by secondary ideas and detail.

Criterion 8: C8: Simplicity (Weighting W8=2). To hold the reader's attention, the author should convey an idea as quickly and clearly as possible. Words should be common to the subject domain and not overblown, weighty or exaggerated for their own effect. Simplicity means conciseness by eliminating redundant, non-contributing words that merely fill a sentence.

Criterion 9: C9: Readability (Weighting W9=2). Readability refers to a smooth, easy-to-read style using carefully selected words, appropriately formal and informal grammar and sentence variations. Irrelevant and self-serving asides detract from the desired professional tone of a paper and quickly lose the reader's attention and interest. Pompous, obsolete, careless or incorrect words distract the reader from the author's essential purpose: to get across the ideas and supporting information quickly and effectively.

Download NACCS 2010 Best Paper Award Nomination Form

Download Best Paper Award Review Report Form