Indexing:

MECO and CPSIoT belong to the internationally most esteemed and most reputable events (conferences) in the fields of:

• Computer Science,
• Embedded Systems,
• Cyber Physical Systems,
• Internet of Things,
• Artificial Intelligence,
• Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design
• Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
• Human-Computer Interaction, and
• Related Fields

They last for decade and are highly cited and indexed in almost all relevant databases in the area of ​​interest, inter alia:

• IEEE Xplore (more…)
• SCOPUS
• Web of Science (WoS)
• Microsoft Acadmic
• Schematic Scholar
• Google Scholar
• Research Gate
• SJRScimago Journal & Country Rank, and
• and other relevant database

Growth:

MECO is a growing conference in both quantity and quality. We started with 73 papers and last year we had 192.

Famous guests:

We are very proud of the fact we have hosted 3 Nobel Laureates in the last decade.

Prof. Dan Shechtman, keynote at MECO 2016

Prof. Tim Hunt, Nobel, Keynote at MECO 2018

Prof. Jerome Isaac Friedman, keynote at MECO’2019

More about our famous guests, their interviews for MECO, about our keynote speaakers as well as about other interesting stories that show the spirit of our conferences you can find at MECOnet Press-Media Corner

Feedbacks:

Transparency is one of our pillars. MECO and CPSIoT committees and organizers are very devoted to the quality of their programs. The opinions of the participants helped us to outgrow. Surveys are mandatory, and results from previous years can be found at

MECO 2020 Feedbacks from participants

MECO 2019 Feedbacks from participants

MECO 2018 Feedback from participants

MECO 2017 Feedback from participants

Some of the opinions:….

Please, provide any comments with regard to the academic program of MECO 2020 and CPSIoT 2020?

• Selection of the academic program was very good and interesting.
• The academic program of Meco 2020 widely presented achivements in embedded system development and is very useful for scientists and designers working in corresponding fields
• Everything was OK.
• I liked everything
• Congratulation. Excellent program for both activities.
• This conference are the best opportunity for transfer of knowledge. Themes was very up-to-date.
• Excellent
• On paper it looked great, but the presentation level was rather low. People cannot present their work in informative and interesting manner. They only read their slides with a lot of text with broken english in a low quality videos. Allowing presenters to record videos beforehand was a mistake. Nobody attended the sessions, sometimes not even the authors.

Please, provide any comments with regard to the organizational aspects of MECO 2020 and CPSIoT 2020?

• Everything was very nice.
• Unfortunatly a could not participate in online session because platform for participation was not exactly defined. May be next time organizers would offer some shared resuorce accessible by all participants
• Everything was OK.
• I liked everything
• Excellent organised
• The organisation of MECO and CPSIoT 2020 was on prestigious level.
• Excellent
• You did very well in those difficult times. I was very satisfied with the remote conference, I didn’t expect it to turn out so well

What was your main positive experience with regard to your participation at the MECO 2020 or CPSIoT 2020 conference?

• The main positive experience with regard to my participation was that all Scientific and Editorial Board (Chairs) and all other stuff were very professional and ready to answer to all our questions/and requests.Thanks again.
• New manner of presentation
• I loved the good environment and treatment from the organizers
• To meet my colleague from other countries.
• Everything: Scientific level, networking, organisation, hospitality.
• Achived new knowledge and established a new collaborations.
• The presentations
• It all went smooth, considering the COVID crisis. The zoom rooms and sessions were well planned and moderated. Especially room no. 2
• very well organized .

What was your main negative experience with regard to your participation?

• No negative experience
• non
• This is a bit related with the authors: The fact that everything is digital makes that some things didn’t work fine. For example, some authors didn’t show up. Some authors either didn’t send presentation or they just sent a video but since they didn’t attend it was not possible to ask questions to them. This is related with the organization: it was good that we knew which papers were presented in each session. However, it would be nice to have a schedule in which we know which papers are presented at the same time. I had to go through all the papers to see which ones I could attend and which ones were colliding. It would be nice to have like a calendar in which it was possible to see the papers presented in the different days and different time slots so that we didn’t have to figure out which papers collide in time.
• It was hard to find the e-mail about the copyright.
• There is not any negative experience
• I did not have negative experience.
• None
• The level of presentations (not the scientific level, but the presentation level). I am always critical about the way, people present their research and I’m rarely satisfied. Broken english and reading of slides, on top of that low quality videos
• some of presentation and slides quality

Please, provide us with any comments/suggestions, which can be useful for preparing next year conference.

• I hope in the next year we will have a live Conference
• Earlier advertising about the event
• Introducing common Platform for on-line participation with an understandable instruction for users
• Keep going!
• To continue at the same way, and may be for some presenter, which have not possibilities to participate, to do the presentation online.
• I wish you to be the best as you always was.
• Keep it professional!