Comat

Prof. Dan Eliezer received his PhD in Materials Science and Engineering, as well as his M.Sc. and B.Sc.,  from the Technion Institute of Technology in Israel. He holds the title of Doctor Honoris Causa from the University Politehnica of Bucharest. He also received the title of Doctor Honoris Causa from the Gheorghe Asachi Technical University of Iași. He has a long-standing relationship with Transilvania University of Brașov. He was a Research Associate at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He also worked at the joined NASA-AMES Research Center in California. He was a National Research Council Senior Associate at the Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio. He was the Head of the Department of Materials Engineering at Ben-Gurion University for ten years and part of highly ranked administrative committees. He was a Senior Visiting Scientist at BAM, the Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing in Berlin, Germany. There he received the prestigious Wilhelm Oswald Fellowship. Professor Eliezer is known for his research in the field of hydrogen interaction in materials, physical metallurgy and environmental behavior of materials. He is also active in international advisory boards for scientific, academic, and insutrial institutions. He is the recipient of many awards and fellowships.

Abstract Review Process - COMAT

COMAT, together with the Organizing Committee, applies a careful, rigorous, and impartial review process for all submitted abstracts. Each submission is assessed based on its scientific quality, originality, relevance, and contribution to the field of the conference.

The final acceptance decision is made by the Conference Chair and/or designated members of the scientific and organizing committees, based on reviewers’ recommendations, with particular attention to originality and scientific value.

Abstracts are evaluated by experts in the field, selected according to their scientific experience and research contributions in the relevant thematic areas of the conference.

The peer-review process follows a single-blind or double-blind model, ensuring the anonymity of authors and/or reviewers throughout the evaluation process.

Review Procedure

1.     Initial Screening
Each abstract is first checked by the editorial team to ensure it fits the conference scope and meets submission requirements. Submissions that do not comply may be rejected without external review.

2.    Assignment to Experts
Eligible abstracts are assigned to appropriate subject-matter experts. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and relevance to the topic of the submission.

3.     Peer Review
Reviewers evaluate each submission and provide constructive feedback along with a clear recommendation (accept, reject, or revise).

4.     Decision Stage
The final decision is made by the scientific committee, based on reviewer reports and overall consistency of evaluations.

Evaluation Criteria

v  Originality and scientific contribution

v  Relevance to the conference themes

v  Methodological and scientific quality

v  Validity and clarity of conclusions

v  Clarity and structure of presentation