Yearly Archives: 2013

IEEE Presidential delegation to Africa – November 2013.

In November 2013, the leadership of IEEE visited stakeholders in several African countries to develop a better understanding of key opportunities to expand engineering capacity on the continent. The trip –the second of its kind in 2013— was intended help IEEE to refine and develop emerging efforts that are being pursued with the goal to strengthen, support and advance the engineering ecosystem in Africa.

The trip was led by 2013 IEEE President Peter W. Staecker and included visits in Kenya, Ghana and Tanzania. The other members of the delegation werel be Prof J. Roberto de Marca, President Elect;  Prof. Michael Lightner, Director and Vice President Educational Activities; Matthew Loeb, Staff Executive; Eileen Lach, General Counsel;  Tara Wisniewski, Director, Corporate Development.

President's Delegation - Nov 2013

During the trip, the delegation met with various private and public sector stakeholders including local section members, national ministries of education, science and technology, industry regulators, engineering academia, IBM Research – Africa, Samsung Engineering Academy, WHO Africa, UNDP, GeSCI and others

Steps to Success: IEEE Contests 2014

2014 Presidents’ Change the World Competition

The IEEE Presidents’ Change the World Competition recognizes and rewards students who identify a real-world problem and apply engineering, science, computing, and leadership skills to solve it. The contest offers students the perfect opportunity to have their ingenuity and enthusiasm for engineering and technology recognized by prestigious IEEE members around the globe.
The registration will be open until January 31

If you are interested in the 2014 Presidents’ Change the World Competition, please visit the website: 

2014 Website Contest

The new rules will be published soon… stay tuned 🙂

SPC 2013 Final Results




IEEE R8 SPC 2013 – I phase results

IEEE Region 8 Student Paper Contest 2013 was announced beginning June 2012. The deadline to submit Student Branches best papers to R8 contest was December 15, 2012. 

Within the SPC 2013 campaign the following activities were realized, mainly by emails:

  • Beginning June 2012 a SPC 2012 email call with essential SPC data and rules was sent to all R8 SB chairs.
  • The same email was also sent to all SB counselors.
  • Different versions of the SPC calls were sent to SB chairs and counselors three more times.
  • All Region 8 IEEE student members got two times emails with information about various Students’ activities, including SPC.
  • Notes about SPC were included in Region 8 News/Student news, June and December issues.
  • A SPC Workshop was organized during the 2012 Student Branch and Gold Congress in Madrid.
  • Section chairs, Section students’ representatives and student activities officers also obtained basic information about SPC, asking them to support and co-organize SPC activities. It was especially emphasized to connect when possible local SPC contests with other IEEE R8 Sections and Chapters activities.
  • Several other single activities were realized in order to make SPC 2013 more successful.

Before the deadline 42 student papers were submitted. 41 student papers were accepted, one paper was rejected (duplicate). Before the selection of the SPC Oral Finalists four more papers were excluded from grading process (three were found as already published and one was part of doctoral studies).

SPC 2013 contestants were from 22 Sections and 34 different Student Branches:

  • University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa;
  • Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland;
  • University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia;
  • Queen Mary University of London, London, UKRI;
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany;
  • Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany;
  • Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt;
  • University Carlos III of Madrid, Madrid, Spain;
  • University of Nis (Jt. ED-015/SSC-037), Nis, Serbia and Montenegro;
  • Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Piraeus, Greece;
  • KU Leuven, Leuven, Benelux;
  • Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark;

  • University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia and Montenegro

  • University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran;
  • Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria;
  • University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro;
  • Ecole Nationale d’Ingenieurs de Sfax (ENIS), Tunisia;
  • University of Greenwich, Greenwich, UKRI;

  • Catholique Univ of Louvain (Jt. CAS-004/, Louvain, Benelux;

  • Universita del Salento, Salento, Italy;

  • Opole University of Technology, Opole, Poland;

  • Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, Benelux;

  • Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary;

  • University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia;

  • Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland;

  • University of Manchester, Manchester, UKRI;

  • Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russia;

  • Telecom Bretagne, France;

  • Arab American University, Palestine;

  • Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark;

  • Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

  • Saint-Petersburg State Polytechnic University, Saint-Petersburg, Russia

* University of Naples Parthenope, Naples, Italy

* ISCTE University Institute of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

The first phase of the IEEE Region 8 Student Paper Contest – selection of the best five papers for Oral Finals – finished beginning of March 2013. During the I phase the International Jury:

  • Prof. George Paunovic, Serbia – Chair, [email protected]
  • Prof. Samir Shaheen, Egypt,

  • Prof. Andrzej Pacut, Poland,

  • Prof. Carlos Lopez-Barrio, Spain,

  • Prof. Mario Cifrek, Croatia,

anonymously graded papers. The contributions were graded as follows:
– Written paper evaluation:

  • 45 points maximum for the technical and engineering content,
  • 25 points maximum for the paper content presentation.

The Jury of the IEEE Region 8 SPC 2013 selected the following five papers (in alphabetical order of the author’s first name) for the SPC 2013 Oral Finals:

Marcos André Pinto:Web-Based System for Automatic Evaluation of Java Algorithms”, ISCTE – University Institute of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Saeed Karimimehr : “A Novel Face Recognition System Inspired by Computational Neuroscience”, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran;

Maarten Van de Put : “Band-to-band tunneling in III-V semiconductor heterostructures”, KU Leuven, Leuven, Benelux;

Giel J. Op ’t Veld: ”On a New Compressed Sensing Paradigm in The Modulated Wideband Converter”, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, Benelux

Diego Marmsoler: “On the Laws of Failure: A Theory of Compensable Programs”, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany;
IEEE R8 Student Paper Contest 2013 – II phase


Second phase of the SPC 2013 – Oral Finals were successfully realized in Zagreb, Croatia, on Monday July 1, 2013, during the EUROCON  IEEE Conference ( SPC finalists obtained up to 30 points maximum, depending on the quality of the paper presentations and given answers.

Session was reasonably well attended. The papers Power Point introductions were well prepared and presented (all within permitted 15 minutes). There were quite a number of questions, both from Jury members and from audience. The finalists’ answers were very good.

When session finished, Jury had a private discussion and awarded three prizes, from the IEEE Life Member Fund, to:


I prize:  Diploma and 800 USD (cash award amount):

Maarten Van de Put: “Band-to-band tunneling in III-V semiconductor heterostructures”,

KU Leuven, Benelux Section;


The KU Leuven Student Branch, from which the I prize winner of the SPC 2013 came from, will receive the Region 8 “Dick Poortvliet Award”, an amount of USD 250;


II prize: Diploma and 500 USD (cash award amount):

Saeed Karimimehr:  “A Novel Face Recognition System Inspired by Computational Neuroscience”, Isfahan University of Technology, Iran Section;


III prize: Diploma and 200 USD (cash award amount):

Diego Marmsoler:  “On the Laws of Failure: A Theory of Compensable Programs”, Technical University of Munich, Germany Section;
The official recognition of the winners, finalists and SPC Jury was organized during the EUROCON 2013 Gala Dinner, July 3,  2013. IEEE Region 8 Past Director Marko Delimar and SPC 2013 Coordinator George Paunovic introduced all the SPC finalists, members of the Jury and pronounced three winners. All finalists also obtained certificates that their papers were selected within the five best SPC 2013 papers.

All finalists papers were included in EUROCON 2013 Proceedings, will be included in IEEE Explore digital library and will be posted to SAC/SPC Internet pages.

After sending the SPC final results to IEEE services, the official prizes (diploma and money) are to be sent by IEEE Services to winners within the next period.

As soon as possible, complete report-information about the results of IEEE Region 8 Student Paper Contest 2013 will be posted at SAC page, including several pictures. An article about SPC 2013 was planned for Region 8 News.


Professor George Paunovic,

IEEE Region 8 Student Paper Contest coordinator



SPC 2013 Rules


 1. Once every year, each IEEE Student Branch (SB) may hold a Student Paper Contest (SPC) under its own responsibility.

  1. The winner(s) of each Branch Contest may compete for the Region 8 Contest, held within the Region limits. A Branch may submit one paper for every 100 branch members or part thereof, with a maximum of three papers.
  2. At Region 8 Contest an international Jury, will grade the written papers without knowledge of the identity of the author and of his school. Jury will decide which papers will be accepted for presentation at the Region 8 SPC oral finals.

4. Only IEEE student members and IEEE graduate student members are allowed to be authors of the SPC papers. Each author has to be a member of an IEEE R8 Student Branch at the time of the original submission of the paper to the Branch Contest and a member (student or not) of the IEEE at the time of the oral presentation. The work presented has to be completed before the student receives the engineering degree that entitles him/her to start preparing a doctoral thesis and the submission of the paper to the Region 8 Contest must be completed within 12 months after graduation. A doctoral thesis is not considered.

  1. Although the original paper – i.e. the paper that was submitted to the local Branch Contest – may  be written in any language, the paper that is submitted to the Region 8 Contest should be in English. The oral presentation shall be in English, as well.
  2. When entering a paper in the Region 8 Contest, each SB Counselor will provide a document certifying that condition 4 is fulfilled, giving the IEEE membership number(s) of the author(s), and stating during which year(s) after high school the work has been performed. Any other useful information concerning the work and background is welcome. This document should be attached to the Student Paper Cover Sheet (see “Author Guidelines on Paper Layout” and “Student Paper Cover Sheet”).
  3. Finalists selected by the Jury will be invited to present their papers at one of the Region 8 Conferences. If acceptable to the organizers of the conference at which the oral finals take place, the papers that have been accepted for oral presentation will be published in the proceedings of that conference and possibly included in IEEE Xplore Database. The final format of the papers, with included authors’ names and affiliations, should be in accordance with the conference proceedings’ rules. Electronic versions of the finalists’ papers will also be published in the IEEE Region 8 SAC web pages.
  4. Travel expenses (train 2nd class, or plane economy class for very long distances) will be provided by the Region 8 Student Activities Fund to one author of each paper accepted by the Jury for oral presentation. Living expenses which may occur while attending the oral presentation may also be reimbursed; the guidelines for this reimbursement will be mailed to attendees before the presentation.
  5. The Life Member Fund is offering three prizes (the year 2011 amounts were respectively 800, 500 and 200 US Dollars). Furthermore, the Region 8 Student Activities Fund offers 250 US Dollars as the “Dick Poortvliet Award” to the branch where the winner comes from.
  6. Published work is excluded from the Contest.  Any paper subsequently published should mention an acknowledgement of the received award.



 11. Papers should cover technical and engineering aspects of a subject reasonably within or related to the areas with which the IEEE is concerned with.

  1. The work need not be original in engineering content, but should be original in treatment and concise in coverage of the author’s contribution to the subject.



 13. The paper must be typewritten on A4 size paper (210 mm × 297 mm), with the text width equal to 183 mm and the text height equal to 243.5 mm; a font size of 10 pt or larger should be used. The two-column IEEE Transactions style (with the space between columns equal to 4.1 mm) is required.

14. The paper should not exceed six (6) pages. Overlength papers will not be considered for the contest!



 15. An electronic version (pdf file) of the paper is to be sent before the deadline to the IEEE Region 8 Student Paper Contest Coordinator:

Prof. Dr. George Paunovic, email: [email protected], fax: +381113370159.

Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Belgrade, Bulevar kralja Aleksandra 73,

PF 3554, 11120 Belgrade, Serbia.

It is required that the version of the paper sent to the Region 8 Contest does not show the identities of the authors and their educational establishments.

The paper MUST be accompanied by the

  • Student Paper Cover Sheet (separate doc file),
  • SB Counselor certification document from point 6 (separate scanned file or copy sent by fax), and
  • signed IEEE Copyright form
  1. The submission deadline is 15 December.  



 17. Those authors selected to give an oral presentation should develop a pleasant and logical presentation of the subject matter fitted to 15-20 minutes. The Jury will question each contestant for an additional period of 10 minutes typical.

  1. An electronic presentation – based on Power Point, for instance – using a beamer (LCD data  projector) is preferred. Additional presentation tools may be provided if a request is made and granted in advance. The presentation should not attempt to cover the entire paper, but rather to give a general idea and enlarge on one or two specific points.



  1. There shall be maximum five judges within Jury.
  2. The contributions are graded as follows:


  • written paper
    • technical content: 45 points maximum,
    • technical presentation: 25 points maximum,
  •  oral presentation: 30 points maximum.
  1. A preliminary selection based on the written document may be made by the members of the jury, either if too many papers are submitted or if some papers do not reach the expected level or formal requirements.



The following guidelines are suggested to assist grading by providing a uniform layout. In general, the paper should be organized as follows:


  • Student Paper Cover Sheet and Counselor Certification Document. Since the judges must handle the papers without knowledge of the identity of the author and his educational establishment, it is required that the paper itself show no such identification other than the title. The title, author(s)’ name(s) and IEEE membership number(s), corresponding author’s address, school, and Branch Counselor’s name must be shown on a removable cover sheet. The Counselor’s certification document should be removable too.
  • Title page. The title should consist of the minimum number of key words necessary to portray accurately the content of the paper. Reader’s interest is stimulated by a well-chosen title. The author’s name should not appear on the title page, nor should any other name of persons or schools.
  • Abstract. The abstract should not describe the paper, but should give in brief the essential facts of its content, for example, a brief statement of the problem or objective and a concise summary of results or conclusions, touching upon methods or other details only if they are unique or if they are of some particular significance. The abstract should be no longer than 100 words.
  • Introduction. The introduction should lead to the development of the subject so that the reader may obtain a clear understanding of the significance of the paper. This often can be done by giving briefly the state of the art as background. Then bring out the added advantages of the method of approach and emphasize the importance of the results or conclusions.
  • Body. The main argument of the development of the subject is carried out in the body of the paper, complete with supporting data. The argument should proceed in a logical sequence according to a prepared outline. The writing should be in the third person. Supporting data and results can often be presented most effectively as curves, charts or tables. Well-known abbreviations may be used in the text but should be defined where used the first time, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. Generally, the use of abbreviations should be confined to not duplicate text matter.
  • Conclusion. The conclusions are often considered the most important part of a paper. They should be stated concisely in a separate section at the end of the paper. If there are three or more conclusions, greater emphasis can be obtained by numbering each conclusion and setting it off in a separate paragraph.
  • Tables. Tables should be numbered consecutively using Roman numerals. Small tabulations or listings may be made in the text where necessary for continuity. Each table should be titled by giving a brief description as a heading following the table number at the top. Ditto marks should not be used in tables, but brackets may be used to group information common to several lines.
  • Diagrams. Three types of diagrams may be used: photographs, oscillograms, line drawings. Keep reading matter on illustrations to a minimum; include it in the captions. Portions of illustrations may be identified by letters and explained in the captions. Whenever feasible, combine several curves on the same co-ordinates. Their identifying letters or numbers should be in clear spaces between cross-section lines. If it is necessary to place data over cross-section lines, erase these lines.
  • Appendices. Detailed mathematical proofs, development of equations, and examples which are subordinate to the main argument in the body of a paper, but not essential to following the argument, should be treated in appendices. References are made in the text to details in the appendices. Main equations as they are developed should be numbered consecutively, with the number in parentheses opposite the equation in the right hand margin.
  • References.Any information or development taken from books, periodicals or courses, i.e. from any external source, should be clearly referenced in the text and a suitable reference list should be appended to enable the reader to consult those sources. References should be numbered consecutively and should follow the form shown below:
  1.   For a periodical: R. N. Hall, “Power rectifiers and transistors,” Proc. IRE, vol. 40, pp. 1512–1519, November 1952.
  2.  For a book: W. A. Edison, Vacuum Tube Oscillators, Wiley, New York, pp. 170–171, 1948.




The following criteria are suggested to provide a uniform grading standard:

  • Do the authors present their independent work?
  • Is the significant amount of presented work new? Do the authors present a novel interpretation of some existing work?
  • Is the subject matter of substantial technical content and is it presented at an acceptably advanced level?
  • Is the 100-word abstract concise, informative and accurate?
  • Does the written presentation include a satisfactory introduction which properly orients the reader with respect to the general area with which the paper deals ? Does the concluding portion of the paper summarize the reader’s impression of what the work has accomplished ? Are the conclusions supported by evidence?
  • Does the exposition (and analysis which may be involved) proceed in an orderly and logical manner? Is the paper self-contained?
  • Does the author exhibit ingenuity and resourcefulness in methods of presentation, choice of illustrations, use of analogies and the like?
  • Is the paper technically accurate?
  • Is an unmistakable meaning conveyed with acceptable brevity?
  • Is the format and typesetting quality of the paper appropriate?


Student Paper Cover Sheet


Answer concisely and completely the questions in the form below, and send it as a separate file (doc)  together with the paper. Only the second part of the Cover Sheet will be sent to Jury and will help in grading the paper.


  • School:
  • Author(s), with their IEEE membership number(s):
  • Name, address, contact phone and e-mail of author to whom correspondence should be addressed:
  • Name, address, contact phone and e-mail of Student Branch Counselor
  • Name, address, contact phone and e-mail of Student Branch Chair



  • Paper title:
  • What is the problem and why is it important?
  • What is the original contribution of this work? Be explicit.
  • Does this work check and / or extend previously reported work? What work? Give references. Be explicit.
  • How does this contribution compare to previously published work?
  • If the paper is to be submitted to one of the IEEE Transactions, which Transactions would be the most appropriate?



Class of 2014 IEEE Fellows

In 2014, a total of 55 members from Region 8 was elevated to the IEEE Fellow grade. The largest individual Section totals are: UKRI (13), Italy (9), Benelux (7), Germany (6), Spain (6), and Switzerland (5). On behalf of Region 8, we would like to congratulate all newly elected IEEE Fellows with this professional achievement.

A full list of all 2014 IEEE Fellows can be downloaded here.

Webinar in R8: Tips for a successful technical publication

A webinar for “Tips for a successful technical publication” was organized in December 2013, by the IEEE R8 Educational Activities Sub-Committee (EASC) Continuing Education (CE), Niovi Pavlidou, Coordinator, and George Papadopoulos, Volunteer. The webinar was intended to the GOLD (Graduates Of the Last Decade) members of the IEEE in R8. The webinar was quite well disseminated through the IEEE e-Notice service, resulting to 126 registrations in the IEEE vtools platform. The event was organized on WebEx facilities and the attendance was satisfactory with about 50 participants taking place. Niovi Pavlidou welcomed the participants and introduced various subcommittees relating to technical activities, with emphasis on educational activities in R8. The central speaker of the webinar was Prof. George Karagiannidis, Editor-in-Chief, IEEE Comm. Letters. The duration of the webinar was one hour. Both Prof. Karagiannidis and the organizers-hosts of the event received the enthusiasm of the audience, who congratulated both the organization and the presentation, through many emails before and after the event, and through the WebEx instant messaging system. The successful event was recorded on the WebEx platform and is available to everyone for free in the website of IEEE R8 EASC Stay tuned to our future events.

George Papadopoulos, IEEE R8 Volunteer for Educational Activities
Niovi Pavlidou, IEEE R8 Coordinator for Educational Activities

Region 8 GOLD Exceptional Volunteer Award

Among several excellent nominations, the following three individuals have been awarded with the Region 8 GOLD Exceptional Volunteer Award:

khaledKhaled Mokhtar (Egypt)




tomislavTomislav Pokrajcic (Croatia)




andreas Andreas Neumeier (Germany)






Their activities, amazing programs, important involvement in curriculum development, and strong participation at the national level, are great examples from which all of us can learn.

Congratulations on job well done!

IEEEmadC 2013 – it’s time to register !

IEEEmadC (Mobile Application Development Contest) is a Region 8 based student competition focused on developing mobile applications. In this competition, teams of up to three students are invited to devise and create mobile applications that will benefit IEEE in the terms stated in the “Application focus areas” chapter of this document. This competition was created to provide IEEE students with additional competitive activities in the scope of computer science. By competing, students would focus on developing their technical and social (team) skills, since the prizes are arranged in a way to encourage teamwork. The competition can provide Student Branches with an additional way of attracting the students to join IEEE since only active student members of IEEE will be eligible to compete.
For more information please visit the R8 Website, Official Website and Facebook.

Computer History Conference

Third IFIP WG 9.7 Conference on the History of Computing and Informatics in the Former Soviet Union and the Russian Federation (SoRuCom 2014)

This historically-oriented conference was held according to the resolution of the Second International Conference on the History of Computers and Informatics in the Soviet Union and Russian Federation (SORUCOM-2011), successfully held in Velikiy Novgorod. The year 2014 features several anniversaries: 120th anniversary of Norbert Wiener, the originator of cybernetics; 90th anniversary of John Backus, the author of FORTRAN; and 80th anniversary of Nicklaus Wirth and of Sir C. A. R. Hoare. This is also the year of 30th anniversary of the Program Systems Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences (Pereslavl-Zalessky), and 30th anniversary of the journal «Mikroprotsessornye sredstva i sistemy», whose editor-in-chief was Academician A. Ershov. Also included in the conference topics are dates and events of the period 2011-2013: 110th anniversary of Academician S.A. Lebedev and Corresponding Member I.S. Brook (2012), 90th anniversary of M.A. Kartsev, the creator of M-2, and 90th anniversary of Corresponding Member S.S. Lavrov (2013), among others.

Kazan, Tupolev State Technical University

13-17TH OCTOBER 2014



History Milestones Beginner’s Guide

A Region 8 Beginner’s Guide to IEEE History Milestones

Holography Plaque - Copy

The IEEE GHN website is now a part of (engineering+technology wiki) and has an explanation of the process of submitting a proposal for an IEEE History Milestone, and provides a list of answers to some FAQs.  However it seems that there is not a good understanding of the procedure among members and even active volunteers across Region 8.  This document is therefore provided as an introduction and supplement to the available information.

What they are

The IEEE Historic Milestones are recognitions of significant inventions or achievements in the field of interest of IEEE which is considered to have had an important impact.  The invention or achievement must have taken place at least 25 years ago.  There is no upper limit, e.g. it can be, and often is, long before the origin of IEEE (or its AIEE and IRE predecessors).

The Milestones are not a recognition of or award to a person, although often the particular invention or achievement is inseparably associated with a specific person (for example, Holography with Dennis Gabor, the Poulsen Arc with Valdemar Poulsen or Maxwell’s Equations with James Clerk Maxwell).

The Poulson-Arc Oscillator       Used  for Radio Transmitters,      Denmark, 1902  Poulsen-Arc_Radio_transmitter

Evaluation and Approval

It is inevitable that in some cases there are differences of opinion among historians about the originator of something important, for example the answers to such questions as ‘”Who invented radio?”, “Who invented the telephone?”, “Which was the first computer?”   Answers provided may depend upon nationalistic or political influences.

A rigorous evaluation of proposals for IEEE History Milestones is therefore important, and as a result the time between an initial proposal and the final approval by the IEEE Board of Directors takes typically a couple of years.  Adjustment of the proposed title or citation may be necessary and there is then an additional time needed to order, cast in bronze and ship the plaque to the destination in readiness for the installation and dedication ceremony (at which it is usual for the IEEE President or other senior IEEE volunteers to be invited).

Consequently, to see the process through from the first idea to a successful conclusion needs patience and at least one enthusiastic ‘champion’ who will oversee the activity.

The Process:  access to the GHN Website

Proposals for IEEE History Milestones are submitted via the IEEE Global History Network (GHN) website within the ETHW website.   The champion must therefore have Login permission.  All IEEE members can easily get this, by clicking on ‘create an account’ on the Home Page, and choosing an ID name and password, which should be activated within one business day.  Note that this is NOT the name/password which is used for the member’s IEEE web account. They are completely independent (though a particular user might choose to use the same name and or password for both).    Non-members of IEEE can normally also get Login permission, after a review process which may take about a week.

Submission and assessment

The usual procedure is for the champion to enter the proposed title and initial factual data about the proposed Milestone.  The information may be entered in stages, with some required data added later as it becomes available.  For example, it is necessary to have a letter from the owner of the location where the Milestone plaque is to be installed, confirming their willingness to accept it, and to keep it available and accessible to visitors who wish to view it and from the Chair of the Section which will take long term responsibility for it.

Once the proposal has been entered , it will be monitored by IEEE History Center staff, who can provide advice to the proposer(s).   An advocate (often a present or past member of the IEEE History Committee) will be appointed to monitor the progress, seek opinions about its validity, and in due course, make a recommendation about it to the History Committee.  Anyone with login access may contribute to the ‘Discussion’ topics about a proposal, which are open for all to see and to comment upon.  This is strongly encouraged to ensure the widest possible assessment.

The History Committee normally meets face-to-face twice per year, with the Milestone proposals which are ready for a decision on the agenda.   They are then each discussed, and if possible, approved, including the title and citation.   The approved proposal then goes to the next meeting of the Board of Directors for endorsement.   It is unlikely but not impossible that the Board would not approve or ask for changes, but in case this occurs the order for casting the plaque is not normally placed until after the Board of Directors meeting.


Costs and responsibilities                                    .

The plaque is normally regarded as the responsibility of the Section in which it is located.   It might be proposed in the framework of a Society or other IEEE OU, but since it has a geographical location, it is natural that the Section at that location should take the long term responsibility for it.  Any exception to this would have to be strongly justified.  The Section therefore has to pay the cost of the casting and shipping of the plaque, although naturally there is encouragement to obtain sponsorship both for these costs and for the cost of the installation and dedication ceremony.

It is often appropriate to have some kind of technical lecture or seminar associated with the ceremony and it is an opportunity to seek good publicity for IEEE and its activities.

The location of the plaque may be in a public place or on private property, but it is expected that the owner of the location will provide written assurances that the plaque will remain in place and that bona-fide visitors will be allowed access to see it.   Some arrangements for long-term insurance against damage might be needed in some locations.

The location should be as close as possible to the place where the invention or achievement being recognised took place.  Because of the passage of time and the possible change of the buildings and activities in the vicinity, this is sometimes impossible and some reasonable alternative has to be devised.

When the milestone has been installed and the dedication taken place, the basic information about it should be readily accessible on the ETHW website, and it should be included on the interactive map of IEEE Milestones.  The material submitted during the proposal process remains on the website as a permanent record.   It is wise to check the map for possible errors from time to time.

 Version 1.3

Prepared  by Prof Tony Davies, UK&I Section, in 2013, and then updated on19th February 2017.