We developed a number of policies to assure that the MIC conference meets the standards expected by the academic community. 

Every paper that is submitted to MIC is subject to a double-blind review process. The reviewers are mostly members of the international programme committee.  

The Conference Proceedings include only full-length papers that have successfully passed the review process. The Proceedings are published in a form of an electronic book – that is, they have all the features of an academic publication, including its own ISBN number. That makes them into a fully refereed conference publication.  

To induce participation at the conference and facilitate exchange among a high number of participants, we encourage contributions on a wide array of topics. To that end, we also accept presentations of work-in-progress – that is, we allow people who do not submit full papers to present their work in the form of presentations and short abstracts. Short abstracts of all papers presented at the conference are available in an electronic Book of Abstracts. 

For conferences with a high number of participants, it is never easy to assure that most participants attend most sessions. In order to mitigate the no show-up problem, we ask the session chairs to report to us on paper which presenters did not attend the session where they were supposed to present. We may in future refuse contributions from people who neglect the duty to present their accepted papers at the conference. 

We pay special attention to smooth and friendly organisation of the conference. The local organizers are selected by an open call published on our website. We have prepared written guidelines for local organizers to assure that the conference organisation meets our high expectations. We also do our best to keep the costs within the limits that can be covered by existing levels of the participation fee. 

Finally, the general guidelines for the conference are set by a broad international programme committee. The committee meets every year during the conference, evaluates it and proposes improvements for the next year. It also proposes and discusses possible focal topics for the next conferences.