Papers submitted to ICONS should be reviewed based on the following four criteria:

• Significance: This refers to the importance and relevance of the research within the field of neuromorphic computing. Key questions include: Does the paper address a significant or challenging problem in neuromorphic computing? Does it offer a substantial advancement or insight into neuromorphic computing? A paper of high significance would address a critical problem, offer major contributions, or open new research directions. A paper of low significance would address a trivial problem, make minimal/incremental contributions, or have low relevance to neuromorphic computing.

• Novelty: This refers to the originality of the work compared to prior research. Key questions include: Does the paper present genuinely new concepts, methods, or findings? Is its unique contribution clearly differentiated from existing work? Does it propose innovative solutions or significantly advance the state of the art? A paper having high novelty would introduce truly original ideas or breakthroughs. Low novelty papers would offer only minor, obvious, or incremental contributions.

• Scientific Validity: This criterion covers the soundness of the scientific methodology, correctness of results, and clarity of presentation. Key questions include: Are the methods, experiments, or theories appropriate and correctly applied? Are the results accurate, well-supported, and consistently presented? Is the work sufficiently detailed for others to understand and potentially verify? Is the paper well-organized, clearly written, and easy to understand? Papers scoring high on this criterion would comprise a sound methodology, robust results, and clear, rigorous presentation. Papers scoring low on this criterion would show flaws in the scientific methodology, make unsupported claims, or have poor presentation.

• Impact: This criterion covers the potential influence of the work on future research, scientific applications, and the broader neuromorphic community. Key questions include: Will this work influence or inspire new research directions? Does it have potential for real-world applications or technological advancements? What are its overall implications for the field? A high impact paper is likely to significantly influence future research or accelerate technological development. A low impact paper on the other hand is unlikely to significantly influence future work or offer new tools for the community.

ICONS accepts five types of submissions: Full Papers, Short Papers, Extended Abstracts, Tutorial Proposals, and Special Session Proposals. The above criteria must be weighted differently for each type of submission as follows:

1. Full Papers (8 pages) should present novel, impactful, and original research pertaining to the ICONS topics. Equal weightage should be given to the novelty, significance, impact, and scientific validity.
2. Short Papers (4 pages) should present preliminary results pertaining to the ICONS topics. More weightage should be given to the scientific validity; less weightage should be given to the novelty, significance, and impact.
3. Extended Abstracts (1 page) should present an idea, position or salient results pertaining to the ICONS topics. Weightage should be given to the significance and impact for these submissions.
4. Tutorial Proposals (3 pages) should propose tutorials or demonstrations pertaining to software frameworks, hardware prototypes, or introductory lectures related to the ICONS topics. Weightage should be given to the significance and impact for these submissions.
5. Special Session Proposals (3 pages) should propose workshops, panels, or birds of a feather sessions pertaining to the ICONS topics of interest. Weightage should be given to the significance and impact for these submissions.