The deadline for submitting full papers is 21th of April 2017.
The abstracts and papers will be submitted through the EasyChair conference system, which is described in details below. The link to EasyChair conference account is https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=amse20170.
Papers must be thematically related to applications of mathematics and statistics in economics and should fall in one of the following sections:
- Macroeconomics, Public Economics and Methodological Issues of Economics
- Social Economics, Economic Sustainability and Demographic Economics
- Financial Markets, Risk Measurement and Insurance
- Microeconomic Issues
- Multidimensional Statistics in Economics
The collection of conference papers will be sent for evaluation to be considered for inclusion into the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (CPCI), which is an integrated part of the Web of Science database maintained by Thomson Reuters. The past two AMSE conferences (i.e. AMSE 2014 and AMSE 2015) have already been successfully included into the CPCI and the conference AMSE 2016 is in the process of evaluation.
Paper preparation guidelines
An abstract of the paper with keywords should be first sent through EasyChair system. After acceptance of the abstract the first version of the full paper should be prepared according to the template and then sent by Easy Chair system, but without the authors' names and affiliations and other information that can directly identify the authors (e.g. number of the grant supporting the research). The final version of the paper after positive reviews should be uploaded with all that information. Letters (especially in names) can be written with diacritics.
Two templates are available for preparing the conference paper according to the prevailing writing preferences in the academic community. A conference participant may either use a Microsoft® Word template
or a LaTeX template
The paper must be prepared directly in the template and all instructions must be respected if the paper be eligible for publication in the proceedings. The required length of the paper is from 8 to 15 pages. The paper must refer to the current level of knowledge and must use relevant references in it. The recommended number of references is between 6 and 18. The numbering of pages must remain automatic as it is in the template. The abstract and keywords registered in the EasyChair system could be modified in the full paper, but it is not recommended. Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) classification codes should be added in the full paper.
Only original papers can be submitted and presented during the conference. Every author sending his or her paper is declaring originality of it. Each paper passing successfully the review process included in the proceedings will be published online and submitted to the Web of Science database.
Each paper will go through a double-blind peer-review process. The result will either be acceptance without reservations, acceptance after correction in accordance with reviewers comments, or refusal of the paper. Each paper must be presented at the conference.
Paper submission guidelines
The abstracts and papers will be submitted online through the EasyChair conference system, which is accessible for the AMSE 2017 conference at
After clicking on this link the conference participant is kindly asked to login or to create an account through which the paper can be managed during the review process and accessed in later stages. Perhaps some conference participants may have already an account with EasyChair, in which case they may choose to resend their password to their e-mail address under which they were registered at the time.
A Microsoft® Word user will submit only the Microsoft® Word file (the .docx format is recommended). A LaTeX user will upload in the EasyChair system only the pdf files with the anonymous version and the final version, and at last will send the files producing the final version of the paper and its body (i.e. the TeX file as well as the associated external files such as graphics) compressed into one file (preferable in a .zip format) by an e-mail to the Organizing Committee.
Publication ethics and malpractice statement
The following statement bases on the publishing ethics guidelines of Elsevier (https://www.elsevier.com/about/company-information/policies/publishing-ethics) and on the code of conduct by COPE (http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct). It is compiled fully in compliance with Elsevier recommendations.
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed proceedings from the conference Applications and Mathematics and Statistics in Economics 2017 (AMSE 2017) is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method, and therefore the following standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing are adopted. The adopted standards concern the author, the proceedings editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher. The Editorial Board of AMSE 2017 is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
Duties of authors
Reporting standards Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
Data access and retention Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal or conference proceedings concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal or for conference proceedings a previously published paper. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of sources Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the paper Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental errors in published works When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of editors
Publication decisions The proceedings editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the conference should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor is guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of AMSE 2017 and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
Fair play The editor evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. The editor should recuse oneself from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. The editor should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. Non-peer reviewed sections of the proceedings should be clearly identified.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Duties of reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. The Editorial Board of AMSE 2017 shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Promptness Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.