The success of the conference depends on great presenters so thank you for showing an interest. Presenting is a great way for you to learn, help others and connect with others in the community.

We are looking for speakers of all experience levels who would like to contribute to the event.

Presentations should be: • On a subject you are enthusiastic about (this tends to make them much more engaging). • Help LabVIEW developers in a practical fashion or help them innovate on their processes. • Suitable for intermediate (CLD) developers and higher.

In general, presentations should not: • Be primarily self-promotion and marketing. We are a technical conference. • Only accessible or useful to those who have to purchase 3rd party toolkits to use. • Recycled: we want to see original content (but we do encourage you to use local user groups as a practice run)

In return, we commit to • Provide a free ticket to all presenters taking on a full presentation slot (30 minutes). We aren’t in a position to help with travel expenses but if you are concerned, please get in touch with the team. • Give you at least 3 months notice for you to prepare your presentation. • Provide guidance and feedback from our experienced team during the approval process. • Create a relaxed and engaging environment for the enjoyment of presenters and attendees.

Once we have the submissions, they will be assessed by the organisers, and we vote on them as a committee. At least the first round is completed anonymously to promote selection based on the content rather than the speaker.

Abstracts that are deemed to fall foul of our editorial policy will either be rejected, or the team will tend not to vote for it. You will be informed prior to voting if changes are requested. We want to help, so talk to us. Some observations from previous years: • Frameworks did not get voted on. • Useful pragmatic small-scope abstracts did well. • If a single company submits multiple presentations on a similar subject they are unlikely to get through the voting. Most of the team will up-vote for one type of presentation and any similar presentations will suffer. • Presentations that are similar to last year will not get voted on unless it is a subject that still needs expanding. • The team is really busy with their day jobs so long abstracts will not get the attention they deserve.