Academic Village CFP

Want your research to reach outside academia? You are at the right place!

At the academic village we are also idealistic researchers and want to help you disseminate academic research that is likely to have an impact outside of academia. To aid you in disseminating your research we are creating an event where academic cybersecurity researchers can reach out to relevant representatives from industry and other areas of society. The event is held in partnership with Security Fest (one of the largest industrial cybersecurity events in Sweden) and will be free to attend to all interested people.

Therefore, we are happy to invite you to submit any academic research (published or not) which can have a significant impact outside of academic circles and that you would like to disseminate. We will even offer the best submission a free ticket to attend Security Fest this year.

Submission rules

To ensure the content quality and relevance and to minimize the effort required from the reviewers, the following rules apply to all submissions.

On-going review

Submissions may be evaluated at any point after they are submitted and may be accepted way before the submission deadline. To increase your chances of acceptance try to make your submission as early as possible.

Only academic submissions

The academic village strives to help academic researchers to reach out of academic circles with their research. Therefore, all submissions must have a clear academic background to be accepted.

In particular, the academic village is not intended to be a "second chance" for all kinds of submissions that were rejected at the main event. If your work is not academic in nature, you should submit it instead to other venues.

Clear non academic impact

The academic village will prioritize submissions that are likely to have a likely and strong impact outside of academic circles. Try to make this clear in your abstract and on the description of the submission. Submissions where the impact is not made clear may be desk rejected.

No AI generated content

We will not accept any kind of AI generated content. You are encouraged to use AI as an assistant to provide you guidance on how to improve your writing, but you must be the author of any content that you submit to the Academic Village. Submissions that are clearly AI generated or with hallucinations will be desk rejected.

Conciseness, structure and clarity

Try to be as concise in your writing as you can without sacrificing clarity. In the digital era in which we live, page limits do not make much sense anymore but time limits do. Our reviewers are busy and offering their time for free to us only with the hope of helping create a better research environment for everyone and help you have a positive impact in society. Think that if you are respectful of reviewer's times, they are more likely to accept your submission and also to give you good feedback to improve it. Consequently, try to be as respectful as you can of their time and present your ideas being as short as you reasonably can. Try also to provide a clear, interlinked structure so reviewers can skip the parts of your manuscript that may not be relevant to them.

We do not want you to spend time shaving phrases just to use one less page or trimming references to keep the page limit. Instead, we prefer you use that time trying to write a clear manuscript and providing a good structure to make navigating it easy.

Therefore, we do not have any page or word limits for your manuscripts other than the technical 10 MiB limit impossed by the CFP platform.

Publication rights

You keep the rights to all your research and publications as long as the academic village is allowed to publish a copy of your manuscript. Alternatively, link to an openly accessible and free copy of your manuscript. If you have submitted your manuscript somewhere else it is your responsibility to ensure you have the right to grant us the right to make your work publicly accessible free of charge to everybody else.

Open research

Industrial impact depends heavily on how open your research is. If you provide links to relevant artifacts, datasets and other materials, it is more likely that your work will be used by non academic circles. Therefore we encourage you to follow the open research approach and making as much of your research publicly available as possible.

Common sense

Do not do anything you would not do at a normal academic CFP. The academic village is the work of a bunch of academics, hackers and cybersecurity enthusiasts. We are doing this for free, out of passion and due to our love of our cybersecurity related communities.

We do not want to need strict submission rules that must be followed by the letter instead of by the spirit. We do not want to require that you submit a manuscript using some obscure latex template, with a specific minimal font size and a maximum set number of pages. This also means that we appeal to common sense in here.

So, again, try to use your common sense when deciding what and how to submit. If your submission does something that would be frowned upon elsewhere (for example experiments on humans without considering ethical consequences or trying to be "technically" correct about the submission rules), do not do it here either.

Submission types

We will have 3 types of submissions: 30 minute talks, 5 minute lightning talks and posters.

Talks

Talks should introduce relevant research that is almost complete. Talks should last at most 30 minutes including setup and at least 5 minutes of questions.

Lightning Talks

Lightning talks can be used to present incomplete research and research ideas that are likely to have an industrial impact. Lightning talks should last at most 5 minutes including setup and have no questions.

Posters

Poster should introduce research that can already present some results even if incomplete. Posters will be presented during a poster session of at least 45 minutes during the conference.

Review Process

The review process will be structured in x phases. All decisions are final but feedback for improvement is always welcome by the organizers.

The review process will be done dynamically with selection of clearly promising submissions being done early. Try therefore to submit your proposal as soon as you can.

Initial Review

In the first stage of review, the main organizer will ensure the submission is relevant and complete. Common reasons for rejection may be:
* Content which is clearly AI generated
* Content which clearly has no academic background (for example content with no references positioning the research context or that does not follow established research methodologies)
* Content which is very unlikely to have any industrial impact or relevance
* Submissions that are incomplete

Academic Peer Review

During the academic peer review we will assign at least one reviewer to evaluate the academic relevance of your submission. Academic peer reviewers are only required to read your abstract and your manuscript but can be more through if they want. This part of the review is blind to ensure impartiality.

If you have recommended a reviewer, the main organizer believes they can be trusted and they are willing to, they may be offered to participate at this stage.

Your submission may be rejected here if it is not deemed to have a relevant academic background.

Industrial Impact Review

During the impact review we will try to find at least one industrial reviewer to evaluate the impact and relevance of your submission. Industrial reviewers are only required to read the abstract but may check other parts of the submission if they want. This part of the review is (to the extent possible) blind to ensure impartiality.

Your submission may be rejected here if it is not deemed to be likely to have a strong industrial impact.

Submission selection

At this stage the main organizer will choose the accepted submissions based on the reviewers' feedback. Selection will be made trying to prioritize those submissions who are likely to attract interest from non academic circles and that are likely to have a strong impact.

Best Submission selection

Reviewers (other than the recommended one) can nominate submissions to the best submission price. The price will be granted by the main organizer based on the quality and relevance of the presented research,

The author of the winning submission will be offered a free ticket to Security Fest, If they do not want to use it, the ticket will be offered to the second best submission and so on.

Attendance and Code of Conduct

Accepted speakers are expected to physically attend the event and present their submission. Speakers are expected to cover any travel costs by themselves (but will be guaranteed a place completely free of cost at the Academic Village).

All participants, including speakers, are expected to follow the Security Fest Code of Conduct which is available at https://securityfest.com/code-of-conduct/

You can enter proposals until 2026-05-19 07:00 (Europe/Stockholm), 3 weeks, 2 days from now.