Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages

Conference Submission System


The System Dynamics conference invites work related to System Dynamics and systems thinking from all people active in the field including academics, practitioners, teachers, and unaffiliated enthusiasts. Work that is submitted to the main conference will be organized into Plenary, Parallel, Poster, Work in Progress, and Feedback Sessions.  We also invite workshop and other proposals, and there is a Student-Organized Colloquium that is focused on the work of Ph.D.s and other students.



The conference submission system (webportal) is used to manage the process of submitting and reviewing submitted work.

Sign In     Sign Up  to the webportal

The webportal integrates conference submissions and review for research papers, practitioner applications, work in progress, workshops, the Student-Organized Colloquium, meetings, and other activities at the conference.

The available features and capabilities depend on both the time of year, and your role in the Conference and Society. Consequently there may be options discussed in this documentation that are not available to you. If you have questions about what is and is not available at different times please contact the Society Office.

For more help see the technical support below.

Writing up work


The title should be a clear and concise description of your work. Titles must be 127 or fewer characters. You will not be able to enter a longer title.


    • Capitalize the First Letter of Important Words
    • Keep the Title to Fewer than 127 Characters
    • Identify the Key Contribution of the Work


    • USE ALL CAPS – this will clash with session content in the schedule
    • Do not refer to System Dynamics or use words such as “a System Dynamics Approach” or “a Systems Thinking Approach” – this is the System Dynamics Conference and no more needs to be said.
    • Try to provide detail. The title should let readers know what the work is about, not how the work was done.

Paper Guidelines

Generally you should try to format work the way you would submit it to a journal (see example the System Dynamics Review requirements). But you do not need to follow any specific referencing style.

The expectations for conference papers are, of course, not quite the same as those for a peer-reviewed journal, particularly with regard to detailed model documentation and reporting. We recognize that many conference papers report works are still under development and not yet complete.

But, whatever the model’s stage of development, the submission should still demonstrate rigor and adherence to the scientific method. Evidence should be cited supporting model structure, meaning the choice of model boundary, causal relationships, and parameter values. Evidence should also be cited supporting the realism and plausibility of model behavior over time, for as many output variables as possible. Sensitivity and policy testing are expected, and explanation of model behavior as a function of its feedback structure is also important.

Important: Figures and Tables should all be in line.

Regardless of submission type, be clear and precise in your writing; completeness is appreciated, but so is conciseness. In the case of model-based papers, please also take note of recommended practices of model development, testing, and reporting.


Recommended practices of model development, testing, and reporting may be found in the following articles:

Rahmandad H and Sterman JD (2012). Reporting guidelines for simulation-based research in social sciences. Syst Dyn Rev 28(4):396–411.
Martinez-Moyano IJ (2012). Documentation for model transparency, Syst Dyn Rev 28(2):199–208.
Homer JB (2014). Levels of evidence in system dynamics modeling. Syst Dyn Rev 30(1-2):75-80.
Sterman JD (2018). System dynamics at sixty: the path forward. Syst Dyn Rev 34(1-2): 5–47.

See also Tom Fiddaman’s tips on writing good System Dynamics Conference papers: Writing an SD Conference Paper and Writing a good System Dynamics paper II.



Conference Registration Requirement

You do not have to submit work to attend the conference, but you do need to attend the conference to have your work included in the program and the conference record. When you submit work you will need to specify the designated presenter on the Paper Info page. The designated presenter must register for the conference by May 26, 2021 in order to be included in the final conference program, and must attend and present in order to have the work included in the conference record.

Early Decision

We recognize that some participants have more requirements to fulfill for traveling abroad. That might include getting a visa or securing funding. If you need acceptance of your work before May 13, 2021, you may request early decision.

Although we do not recommend this process in general, the program committee will review a paper for early decision for authors who need a long lead-time to acquire visa or funding. If the paper is accepted, the early decisions will guarantee listing in the conference schedule and a scheduled slot at the conference. This early review process will not provide reviewer comments to the author.

To receive an early review, you must first complete the web submission process. Please submit a full paper. After you complete the web submission process, send a separate email message directly to the Program Chairs at requesting an early review and decision. Your submission ID number and the title of your work must be included in this message. A decision will be sent to you by email within two to three weeks.

If your submission for early decision is rejected, you may still revise and resubmit (by the deadline for submissions) for a decision within the regular review process.

If a full paper is provided by the deadline for submissions, the paper will go through the normal review process outlined in the Call for Papers and you will receive comments on the paper. The paper may be scheduled for Poster, Parallel, Plenary, Work in Progress, Feedback, or other presentation type based on this review. Notification of preliminary placement in the program will be sent by June 2, 2021. If you prefer a Poster presentation, please be sure to indicate this on the “Paper Information for Submission” page – this will not affect the review process only the scheduling process.


The Program Chairs reserve the right to reverse any early acceptance decision and reject work if a serious issue with the paper such as plagiarism is subsequently discovered.


If, after submitting your work, you determine that you will not be able to attend please notify the office as soon as possible so that we may withdraw your submission.

Key Dates

Reviewing Work

Review Process

Work submitted to the conference is subject to double blind peer review. This helps in assessment for placement, provides authors with useful feedback on their work, and increases awareness of the range of work being done by including a large number of reviewers.

Everyone who submits work to the conference is asked to be a reviewer. The first time you log in, you will be asked to submit your review preferences.  We also invite other members of the broader community to participate in the review process. To become a reviewer simply log onto the submission portal and click on Review Preferences.

Reviews are assigned as work is submitted. Reviews are due 2 weeks after assignment. If you will be unable to complete an assigned review please send an email to

Review Materials

For research papers you will have a paper between 5 and 30 pages to review. For Work In Progress submissions you will have a 2 page abstract to review. For Practitioner Applications you will have a set of presentation slides to review. For all submission formats there may be supporting material that can also be reviewed. Reviews are, out of necessity, based on the submitted material. Because of the tight timeline for the conference review process it is not possible to request additional material to complete your review.

Review Guidelines

First and foremost, the review process is intended to be constructive. Comments and suggestions should both inform the Program Committee and benefit the authors. They should also be specific. A comment such as “I did not find this interesting” does not help the Program Committee or the authors. Summary assessments are done using the radio buttons for the questions which allow you to quickly rank a submission along a number of dimensions.

Those ranking questions can also be very useful in organizing written comments. For example, the question on Demonstration of significance (Have the authors demonstrated the significance of the articulated question or problem (including appropriate literature citations)?) might suggest literature the authors have overlooked. The Program Committee should know about that as it helps establish grounding, the authors as it will help them make their work more complete.

A review consisting of only the checked assessments and summary comments is perfectly acceptable. You need to add comments to the Program Committee only for issues that should not be shared with the authors.

If you are interested in a more complete discussion of reviewing in general, Wiley (the publisher of the System Dynamics Review) has a writeup. Be brief and constructive.

Comments for Authors: If you have thoughts or ideas for the authors on other things they might try or other places they might look for inspiration, please write them out. A sentence or two in this box can be most appreciated by the authors.

Plagiarism: If, on reading the submitted work, you suspect that it may contain plagiarism, please state that in your comments to the Program Committee. If you know the source of the plagiarized material, please include that in your comments.

Review Questions

The review questions are intended to help in assessment, and also serve as a guide for things that would be good to see in submitted work. These were updated in 2020 based on discussions with current and previous conference program organizers. They are intended to make completion of reviews easier while providing more useful information to the Program Committee. We hope the new form makes your reviewing work easier and ultimately further improves the quality of our conference.

Types of Contribution

Application: Work that applies the techniques of System Dynamics and Systems Thinking to addressing problems or issues related to dynamic systems. The classic: problem statement, reference mode identification, statement of dynamic hypothesis, outcome evaluation procession should be evident in the work.

Methodological: Work that helps in the practice of System Dynamics or Systems Thinking. This include methods for eliciting and measuring knowledge, model analysis techniques, interface design approaches, and other things that are relevant to work in the field.

Other: Relevant work that does not fit in application or methodological. This might be a literature review, history of a project or something else that is best judged by different criteria from the first two categories.

Questions for Research Papers and Practitioner Applications

There are four common questions, then questions specific to the type of contribution.

1. Is the work complete and properly formatted for its submission type (see Writing up Work and Submission Types below), and is the writing clear and easily understood?

2. Have the authors clearly identified a research question or systems problem they want to address?

3. Have the authors demonstrated the significance of the articulated question or problem (including appropriate literature citations)?

4. Do the authors clearly present the results of their work (simulation outcomes for quantitative model based applications, impact and policy discussion for qualitative applications, examples of use for methodological work)?

Application Specific Questions

5. Do the authors provide clear evidence (from experts, literature, or collected data) supporting assumptions concerning structure, logic and, if applicable, parameters?

6. Does the work present policies that clearly relate to the problem or question being addressed along with their analysis?

7. Have the authors investigated the sensitivity of model results and policy recommendations to assumptions (either with simulation experiments or through qualitative assessment for non-simulation based work)?

8. Do the authors explain the behavior of interest in terms of the feedback structure of the system and model?

9. Is there evidence provided that the work has had (is having or will have) an impact for stakeholders?

Methodology and Other Specific Questions

10. Is the value (or potential value) of the work for the practice of System Dynamics or systems thinking clear?

11. Does the work present helpful examples of how the proposed methodology has been (or could be) applied in practice (use cases)?

Work in Progress

Because the presentation of Work in Progress is abbreviated, there are fewer questions to answer:

1. How clearly have the authors articulated the problem that they are addressing with their work?

2. Is it clear how the authors intend to address the problem statement they have acticulated?

3. Have the authors described what has been done and what remains to be done clearly?

4. Is the work described relevant to the theory or practice of System Dynamics or systems thinking?

Submission Types

When submitting work, you can choose from three different conference paper submission types.  Once you have selected a type, it can’t be changed. The submitted review file can only be changed for 24 hours after submission. This is to guarantee that all reviewers see the same material.

There is a limit of two presentations (not including other submissions) for any one person. This restriction applies to the presenter, not all authors. You may be a co-author on more than two submissions. 

Work that has been submitted to, accepted for, or already presented at a different conference, or accepted but not yet published in a journal, will be considered. Submitting an already published journal paper is NOT allowed, though contributions including reflections on past work are welcome. Authors must notify the Program Chairs about previously published work.

Note: Please see Review Questions for helpful guidelines on what should be included in submitted work.

Research Papers

Research papers are a complete scholarly presentation of the work that has been done.  They can include applications to system problems, theory development, model based research, and other relevant work. Research papers will be considered for Plenary, Parallel, Poster, Work in Progress, and Feedback sessions. (see Session Types below).

Research papers are academic style papers of approximately 5000 words (not to exceed 7500 words and between 5 and 30 pages including references) that present the work in a clear and organized fashion. Papers should be properly formatted with an abstract, problem statement, literature review, clear delineation of the contribution being made, presentation of model structure or theoretical framework, demonstration of the model results or theory use, conclusions, and bibliography. The paper submitted for review should conform to standard academic publication standards for presentation and citation (see Writing Up Work below).

The online Conference Schedule and the Conference Record will include a paper or extended abstract for work selected for Plenary, Parallel, and Poster sessions and the title and abstract for papers selected for other session types. You may also provide a link so that people can find updates to your work completed after the conference.

For all submission types you are encouraged to include supporting materials (e.g. models and other material) that can help the reviewer and reader better understand your work. While not a strict requirement, these can help in the assessment process and also to ensure that work is replicatable. 

All submissions will be subject to blind peer review, selection by Thread Chairs and have their disposition finalized by the Program Chairs.

Practitioner Applications

Practitioner applications are work that is documented using a set of slides or equivalent content rather than a formally structured paper. They are typically about work addressing system problems or issues. Practitioner applications will be considered for Plenary, Parallel, Poster (rarely) , Work in Progress, and Feedback sessions (see Session Types below).

Practitioner applications are presentations of work that has been done in the field but not written up in a paper. Typically these will consist of a set of 10 to 30 slides that can be used to explain the work. The intent is to expose work being done by people who are not academics to the broadest possible audience.

There are no specific requirements, but the slides should clearly indicate what the problem being addressed is, what the model or framework used to address the problem is, and what results and recommendations came out of the work. Including a slide with bibliographic references is also encouraged. Application presentations may hold back model structure or data presented to protect client confidentiality, but still need to convey the fundamental dynamic insights. Application presentations are considered for all session types.

The online Conference Schedule and the Conference Record will include slides or an extended abstract for work selected for Plenary, Parallel, and Poster sessions and the title and abstract for papers selected for other session typesyou may also provide a link so that people can find updates to your work completed after the conference. 

For all submission types you are encouraged to include supporting materials (e.g. models and other material) that can help the reviewer and reader better understand your work. While not a strict requirement, these can help in the assessment process and also to ensure that work is replicatable. 

All submissions will be subject to blind peer review, selection by Thread Chairs and have their disposition finalized by the Program Chairs.

Work in Progress

Work in progress submissions will be considered for Work in Progress and Feedback session types (see below)The extended abstract should include a clear problem statement, a description of the intended approach to addressing that problem, and the status of work that has been done so far.

Submissions should be in the form of a 2 page abstract that describes the problem or issue being addressed, the approach being used to address it, the progress that has been made on the work so far, and some indication of what comes next. The submitted file should also include a bibliography (there are no length limits on that). You are also encouraged to include supplementary material (e.g. models and other material) if that can help the reviewer and reader better understand your work. While not a strict requirement, these can help in the assessment process and also to ensure that work is replicable. 

Work in progress submissions do not need to be complete. Both the work and the writeup may be in-process. The key point is to share what you are doing to get more input, and possibly wisdom, from others attending the conference.

Slide Format

Work in progress presentations are 5 minutes with 5 minutes of discussion. All slides for the session are collated by the Session chair into a single PowerPoint file. Each presenter must upload slides that follow the Work in Progress Template.

Page 1 Title and authors.

Page 2 Problem statement. A succinct description of what the issue or system problem is that is being addressed by the work.

Page 3. Dynamic Hypothesis/Approach. For applications this is a causal loop diagram or model overview that describes the extensive boundary of the model being developed. For other work this is a description of the approach being used to address the problem.

Page 4. Progress. Work in Progress submissions are welcome at all phases of work completion. They present an opportunity to share with others what work is being done and potentially find new collaborators related work.

All submissions will be subject to blind peer review, selection by Thread Chairs and have their disposition finalized by the Program Chairs.



In addition to the above, the System Dynamics Conference offers Workshops, a Student-Organized Colloquium, Roundtables, and other activities including meetings of Chapters and Special Interest Groups (SIGs) and committees.  

Submissions to the other category are assessed based on an abstract of approximately 250 words. Other/Meeting activities are not part of the review process, but instead are managed by the Society Office with the approval of the Program Chairs. If you are not sure if “Other” is the appropriate category, please contact the Society office.

Session Types

Submissions will be considered for eight different session types. Submissions will be organized according to several conference threads.   While you have some flexibility to choose among the type, the Program Committee will determine the final selection.


Plenary sessions are oral presentations to all attendees at the conference. There are typically 3 presentations in a session with each being 20 minutes.  This will be followed by 10 minutes for questions.  Plenary sessions will be recorded for later viewing by conference attendees.  To accomotate alternative time zons, Plenary Discussions will be held for each plenary, with sufficient time lag to allow participants to view the plenary session recordings before the discussions.


Parallel sessions are oral presentations to a self selected subset of attendees. There are typically 6 to 10 parallel sessions at a time, with one hour for 3 presentations. The presentations are 15 minutes with 5 minutes for questions.  Parallel sessions will be recorded for later viewing by conference attendees.  Instead of the Echo Sessions in the 2020 Conference, Dialog sessions will be arranged by topic, and will include discussion of parallel and WIP sessions, as well as other dialog about the topic (hot topics, areas of future work, potential collaborations, etc.). Parallel and WIP authors will provide single-slide summaries of their work for the dialog audience.


Poster presentations are an interactive format in which the authors stand near a poster presenting their work and discuss it with one or two conference attendees at a time. There can be one or more times devoted to poster presentations, and there are no other activities at the time of poster presentations.

Dialog Sessions

Dialog sessions will be arranged by topic, and will include discussion of parallel and WIP sessions, as well as other dialog about the topic (hot topics, areas of future work, potential collaborations, etc.). Parallel and WIP authors will provide single-slide summaries of their work for the dialog audience.

Feedback Sessions

Feedback sessions are discussant based presentations in which a senior member of the community summarizes submitted work and leads discussion related to directions the work could be taken or results presented to increase the importance of the work. Feedback sessions are typically one hour in length and may be scheduled contemporaneously with other parallel sessions. They can include up to 6 submitted works and have a single discussant who does all presentation.


Workshops are held at the end of the conference. They are 1 1/2 hours in length (or can be combined to 3). 

In the interest of fairness, and to ensure breadth of coverage there is a limit of four 90-minute workshop slots (6 hours total) for any organization (or individual or group of individuals representing this organization) offering to give workshops.

Workshops can focus on software, skills, process, or topics. Workshops submissions consist of a description of the workshop and also a number of questions relating to format and logistics. See Workshop Submissions for more details.

The conference program includes two full days of skill-building, hands-on workshops, and tutorial sessions that run in parallel. Workshops cover a range of topics from basic software use to advanced analysis techniques, demonstrating the state of the art in the theory and application of System Dynamics. Workshops are open to all conference attendees at no additional cost. All attendees, whether presenting or not, must register for the conference.

Workshops are facilitated by experienced System Dynamics practitioners. Those less experienced are encouraged to submit a research paper, practitioner application, or work-in-progress paper to be considered for the regular program.

Workshop proposals require an abstract and additional information described below, based on which the proposal will be accepted or rejected. You do not need to submit a paper with your workshop proposal, and it is not expected. You may, however, include a link to provide supporting material that will be helpful to workshop participants. Additional helpful information on workshop submissions is available here.

Acceptance of workshop proposals is based on significance, interest to system dynamicists, and level of audience interaction or hands-on involvement. The workshop sessions are intended to be purely instructional; no commercial promotion is allowed. If you are presenting a workshop related to commercially available products or services, we ask that you defer any discussion of pricing, customers, testimonials or other marketing related issues to a time outside the workshop. The workshop itself should be entirely devoted to conveying the content described in the abstract. Presenters may give a website and contact information and make available a brochure to participants.

Proposals for workshops and tutorials are welcome and can be submitted online between January 27, 2021, and March 25, 2021. For full information and to submit, please choose the submission type Workshop Submission from the User Menu.

Check out here the information you will be asked to provide.


Getting Started with [software] Workshop

Getting Started with [software]” Workshop Submission Software vendors are welcome to offer workshops at the conference introducing the use of their software. The workshops will introduce attendees to the mechanics of the software and will provide an opportunity for attendees to get hands-on experience with a demo version. This type of workshop has been offered before and has received great reviews from our attendees. This is a general invitation to offer a software workshop.

The sessions are intended to be purely instructional. No commercial promotion of the software is allowed. Please do not plan to (a) address issues of pricing and license options, nor (b) list or describe companies for whom models have been developed using the software, nor (c) list or describe the types of models that have been done for hire using the software. Presenters may give a website and contact information, but no more than that, for marketing and promotion.

Software users’ group meetings will be held during the conference. If you are a software provider, please send an email message to to schedule a software users’ group meeting.

On the Submission Home page, scroll down and click the “Workshop Submission” button. Click through to the page titled “WORKSHOP SUBMISSION 2019 International Conference of the System Dynamics Society,” please fill in all the fields using the standardized title “Getting Started with [insert software name here] Software.”



Abstract: (For Program and Conference Record) maximum 250 words

Here is a sample abstract (only an example):

This workshop will be an introduction to building System Dynamics models using [software]. The workshop is intended for people who are relatively new to the field or do not have experience using [software]. The session will be conducted as a hands-on workshop and will demonstrate basic techniques for building and analyzing causal loop diagrams, stock and flow diagrams, and simple simulation models. Participants should bring their own computers with the specific software loaded on them or show up one-half hour early to load the software. People without computers are welcome to watch, and they will be paired or in small groups to work together with those who do have computers.

Workshop Description: (For Chairs) minimum of 200 words, but not more than one page.

Thread: scheduling will be based on the thread.

Link information: may be used for reading, software downloads, or other related information.

Other Workshop Specifics you will be asked to provide:

Time Needed: Workshop time slots are 1.5 hours, 3 hours, or 6 hours.

Expected number of participants

Space: Indicate if your workshop is limited to a certain number of participants. (Most rooms accommodate up to 100.)

Room Set-up: Choose set-up of room: Theater, Classroom, Work group, or U-shaped.

Restrictions: Indicate any special room set-up or scheduling restrictions.

Participant Requirements:

Level of System Dynamics experience targeted by the workshop (Everyone, Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced).

What should the participant bring to the workshop? (For example: a laptop.)

What reading or preparation should participants do? Provide link or upload advanced reading material or paper about the workshop.

Upload other supplementary material or model.

Notes for Program Committee: Notes to program committee including target sessions, related papers and thread issues.

(Please note that though we will convey participant requirements to those signing up for the workshop, not everyone will pay close attention, and some will likely show up less than fully prepared).


In addition to the Plenary, Parallel and Poster sessions there are a number of activities that occur around the time of the conference. Many are meetings related to Chapters and Special Interest Groups (SIGs) and committees, but proposals for round tables, K-12 activities and other organized discussions are also encouraged.  Some of these meetings will take place during the conference, and others may take place remotely in the month following the conference.  The format and timing is flexible, but is usually best fit into a 30 minute to 1 hour slot at the conference.

Student-Organized Colloquium

On the Sunday prior to the conference, the Student Chapter organizes a colloquium.  This session is free to attend and open to all.  It features the work of students and recent gradutates.  It also often includes keynote speakers of interest to the student chapter.

Submissions to the Student-Organized Colloquium consist of a full paper, poster or an extended abstract. See the SOC submission guidelines for more details.


All presented work will be shared in the conference record which can be accessed at the bottom of our conference page. 


Conference works and presentations are a networking tool for members of the Society and those who attend a conference. The Conference provides a venue for presenting work and receiving comments that can strengthen the work and help to prepare it for wider distribution.

The Conference Record is not intended to be a substitute for publishing in peer-reviewed journals. The strength of the field requires publishing good work, to reach audiences beyond those attending our conferences. Consult with highly experienced professional System Dynamics colleagues for suggestions on making your work ready for publication and for suggestions of where to publish.


All material presented at the conference will have the title, authors, abstract, and a link to author information included as part of the Conference Record. Work accepted for Plenary, Parallel, and Poster sessions will optionally have:

  • an extended abstract (<5 pages and include a biography) or, for application presentations a slide presentation (5-30 slides) and
  • supplementary materials (including models and other content useful for understanding the results presented). 

Extended abstracts should be short (< 5 pages) and include a bibliography. An example showing suggested formatting for Extended Abstracts. The basic content and presentation should follow the guidelines in Writing Up Work.

Note Uploaded files must be 2 megabytes or less in size.

Submission Process

These materials may be submitted anytime after May 13, 2021 and updated until September 7, 2021 and this material will be permanently archived as the conference record.  Use the Author Link to provide access to the published version of the paper or the most current working draft for work that is not yet published. This can be done for all presentation types.

Technical Support

You do not have to be a member of the System Dynamics Society to sign up and submit or review work, though we encourage you to consider becoming one.

If you have not created an account on the System Dynamics Society’s web site you can do so by going to the registration page.

If you have previously signed up on the Society website, but no longer have access to the email you signed up with, you can send an email to asking to have your email updated so you can reset your password. Doing so will help us keep cleaner records of people in the System Dynamics community.

If you have co-authors who are have not signed up on the System Dynamics website please encourage them to do so. There will be an opportunity to add co-authors who are not in the system during the submission of your work, but it will go much smoother if they sign up themselves.

To sign in simply direct your web browser to If you already signed in on the System Dynamics Society site, you will immediately be redirected to the user menu. Otherwise you will see a sign in page that looks like this:

Enter your username and password. If you don’t have a username see the prior tab, Signing Up. If you have forgotten your password use the “Lost your password?” link at the bottom.

Note If you have set up more than one account with the Society use the email that you prefer to receive conference related correspondence on.

Once you are signed in you will see a user menu:

The contents of the menu will vary depending on your role, and whether you have submitted work for the conference or been assigned as a reviewer for conference work. See the next tab, User Menu for more details.


The main web portal page is the user menu. This is the page you will see when you sign into the system (though the first time you sign into the system you will be directed to the Review Preferences page to fill in your preferences).

The user menu consists of general tasks, tasks specific to the conference and, for members of the Policy Council, tasks related to that work.

General Tasks

For most users the only general task is the option to set up reviewing preferences:

Click on the Reviewing Preferences link to go to the Review Preferences page and set up review preferences. When you are done with that, commit the changes and you will be sent back to the User Menu.

Conference Tasks

Once the conference submissions open you will see options to create a new submission, make changes to any submissions you have made, and review the submissions of others:

Click on the first item (Submission #1006 in this case) to make get to the Paper Menu. You can view and make changes to the submission description and supporting files here. If you have more than one submission, each will appear. If you are a co-author and the original submitter checked the option to allow co-authors to edit, those submissions will also appear.

After the submissions there will be a list of work that you have been assigned to review. The review assignment process is based on your Review Preferences (where you can also self assign reviews if there are any available). Before you have completed a review there will be a link to review (#1002 above). Click on that link to go to the Review Page. Once you have made a review there will be a link to display the content of your review (you can’t change the review after submitting it).

New Submission

Use the New Submission for button to create new submissions related to the conference. This includes work intended for the main conference program such as Research Papers, Practitioner Applications, and Work in Progress (see Submission and Presentation Formats). The second option is a workshop proposal for presentation during the workshop day of the conference. The Student-Organized Colloquium is run on the first conference day and is organized around work under development primarily by graduate students. Other session submissions can include meetings and roundtable ideas that will be fit into the conference program between the main sessions.


If you have work in the conference program, or are chairing a session, your name will appear in the schedule. By including your bio you will allow people to know a little bit more about you. There will be a link to it in the online conference schedule as well as the conference app. If you have uploaded a picture this will also be included and can make it easier for people to find you at the conference. Click on Change to toggle between include and exclude. By default your bio will be excluded (this is an explicit opt-in).

The first time you log into the system you will see the Review Preferences page. You can also go to it by selecting reviewer preference from the User Menu (see previous tab).

Everyone submitting work to the Conference, and anyone who is otherwise interested, is invited to be part of the conference review process. This is a double blind peer review that helps the Program Committee make decisions on paper placements and provides helpful feedback to those submitting their work. You can choose which Threads you want to review work for, how many reviews you are able to do, and what types of work you want to review.

Check the Threads that you feel comfortable reviewing work for. You do not need to be an expert in a particular thread, and reviewing work in areas that are novel to you is a great way to learn more about the breadth of what is being done. For each thread if you hover over it a longer description of the thread will appear. Thread information can also be viewed at Threads

After selecting Threads to review, specify how many reviews you are willing to complete:

Select the number from the drop down (between 0 and 9).

Note Select 0 if you do not want to review any work at all.

Next select which Submission and Presentation Formats you are willing to review:

Note Research papers will be full papers, practitioner applications will be slide presentations, work in progress will be 2 page abstracts.

You may also, optionally, check to see if there are any papers available for review – and select them by title (this list if often empty as reviews are assigned frequently).

Finally, click on the Record Preferences button to finalize your choices.

The paper menu allows you to open the Paper Info and Paper Files menus to update the paper content.

Paper Info

The Paper Info page lets you specify the title, abstract, authors and other information about the paper. Fill in the information by typing, cutting and pasting, or selecting radio buttons.


Your name will be automatically filled in as the first author (you can move that if you do not want to be listed as first author by typing your name into another location). To fill in additional authors type in their last name (pasting will not work here).

As you type, a list of names matching what you are typing will appear. Click in the list to select the author. You can start typing the last name, first name, or email address of the person and their name should appear.

If the author you are trying to add is not in the system click on the link labeled “here” to add them. This will open a simple form:

Fill in the information and click on Add Author. Once you do this they will be added to the web submission system. If they want to log in, they will need to go through a password reset option (based on their email) on the System Dynamics Society’s main website.

Instead of adding an author in this manner you can also ask them to sign up on the System Dynamics web site and then you can return and add them.

Designated Presenter

Every paper needs a designated presenter. That name will be used to resolve scheduling conflicts and introduce speakers. It the first author is not going to be presenting the work click on the one that is.

If you check the All all authors… button every listed author will be able to update the submission information and files.

When you make changes to the paper you should receive an email telling you the change has been recorded.

When you first add your work, submitting the paper information will take you to the Paper Files page. Otherwise, it will return you to the Paper Menu.


Paper Files

The Paper File menu allows you to update different files associated with your work. Which files you can upload will depend on they type of work you have submitted, the acceptance status of the work, and the conference schedule. You get to it from the Paper Menu.

You can submit more than one file at a time. Click on the button for each file you want to submit, then click on Upload Files to upload the submitted files. Problems with the upload may be detected by the server after the files have uploaded. In this case an error message will be displayed.

Cover Page

This is only for Student-Organized Colloquium submissions. Submit a page with detailed contact information as noted.

File for Review

This should be a file with no author names that can be used in the blind review process. You will only be able to upload this when you first submit your work. It is locked after 24 hours to ensure that all reviewers see the same thing. It must be an adobe acrobat document or (for Practitioner Applications) a PowerPoint file.

Supporting Materials

This is a file (commonly a .zip archive) containing models, data or other material in support of the submission. When first submitted it should not include any author information. It can be updated after submission placements have been announced. It will be used as part of the Conference Record for Plenary, Parallel, and Poster presentations.

Paper for online schedule and conference record

For work that is scheduled for Plenary, Parallel, or Poster sessions author’s should upload a paper, extended abstract, or set of slides (in Adobe Acrobat format regardless of the content). This material will be available as part of the online schedule. After the conference website closes, a final extended abstract should be uploaded for inclusion in the conference record. You can update this file anytime during or after the conference until the date shown on the page.

Work in Progress Slides

For work scheduled in Work in Progress sessions the authors need to supply PowerPoint slides for their work. These slides are due before the conference. They will be collated by the session chair into a single slide deck for the entire session so it is important they get in on time. They will be included in the online schedule, but not the conference record.

Presentation Slides

For work that is scheduled for Plenary, Parallel, or Poster sessions author’s can optionally upload the slides they will use in their presentation. These will be included in the online conference schedule, but not the conference record.


This information is only relevant to those who have signed up to review conference submissions.

The review page allows you to review work submitted. The reviewing process is double blind. You will not see they names of the authors for the paper unless they inadvertently included them in their submission. You communicate with them through the review.

The author’s do not see the names of the reviewers. There is an option for an author to send an email anonymously to a reviewer if they want to provide information or thanks based on the review.

The review form will vary depending on the submission type but consists of four basic parts.

Review Material

The abstract for the work will be shown at the top of the review page. There will also be one or two files that you can download to inspect. The first is the paper, abstract, or set of slides that represent the work. The second is supplementary material, such as models or presentations, that may be helpful in assessing the work. There will be links to download these files.

Submission Type

We categorize submissions as Applications (using quantitative or qualitative modeling to address a problem or system issue), Methodological (advancing the practice or teaching of System Dynamics or Systems Thinking or measuring its impact on people) and other (for example historical analysis of work in the field). Since the review questions to be used depend on this classification this is the first thing that needs to be selected.

Assessment Questions

There will be a series of questions that you are asked to respond to based on the category of submission and submission type you have selected. For each of these rank them on a scale of lowest to highest. See Review Questions for discussion.

Written Response

A concise review summary will help the Program Committee assess the work, and it will help the authors improve it. See Review Guidelines for discussion of content. If you have anything you want to communicate only to the Program Committee and not to the authors, enter it into the Program Committee notes. If you have a longer set of notes that you think would be helpful to the authors, enter that in the suggestions for author area. The Program Committee will not see these suggestions.

Note  Once you submit a review you will not be able to edit it.

This content is intended for people working on the organization of the conference program, including Program Chairs, Thread Chairs, Conference Chairs, Colloquium Organizers, Award Committee Members, and Workshop Chairs. For those that are not part of organizing the program there will not be any menu items or options to work on the tasks outlined in this section.


The conference program is organized by sessions, which contain a number of different submissions. For some sessions, such as workshops, there will be a single submission and the session chair will be one of the submission authors.

Student-Organized Colloquium

The Colloquium organizers are responsible for soliciting contributions to the Student-Organized Colloquium, assigning reviewers, selecting material for presentation, organizing sessions, and handling on-site activities during the day of the Colloquium. Lots to do – so this is a brief overview of the steps that directly involve working with the Web Portal.

In addition to this documentation, a useful resource is the Thread Chair instructions, since many activities overlap.

Looking at what is submitted

The User Menu for the Colloquium Chairs will include a link to the papers submitted for the Colloquium.

Click on this link to see a list of papers:

Click on any one of the paper numbers to see more detail about the paper. Click on the author names to see everything the author has submitted to the conference, including regular program, workshops, colloquium, and other.

Assigning Reviewers

The review assignment process for the Colloquium is manual. For each paper in the list of papers described above click on the “Assign Reviewer” button. This will open a review assignment window:

To assign the reviewer click type in their name (pasting a name will not work). As you type, a list of available names will appear:

Click on the name you want to use. Then click on “Submit” when you are done.

You can verify your selection by opening the window again. To remove a selection just erase it, then click on Submit.

When you assign reviewers, an email will be sent to them telling them they have a paper to review with a deadline 2 weeks from the current date. The paper to review will also show up in their menu when they enter the Web Portal.

Note  The review assignment process ignores any review preferences the reviewer might have set. Make sure you only assign reviewers who have agreed to do the work.