We invite authors to submit high quality contributions describing significant, original, and unpublished results in the following categories:

1. Technical Papers

   Technical papers should describe innovative research in modeling or model-based engineering activities. Papers in this submission category should describe a novel contribution to the field and should carefully support claims of novelty with citations to the relevant literature.

   Evaluation Criteria: Technical papers are evaluated on the basis of originality, soundness, relevance, importance of contribution, strength of validation, quality of presentation and appropriate comparison to related work. Where a submission builds upon previous work of the author(s), the novelty of the new contribution must be described clearly with respect to the previous work. Technical papers need to discuss clearly how the results were validated (e.g., formal proofs, controlled experiments, empirical studies, rigorous case studies, or simulations). Authors are strongly encouraged to make the artifacts used for the evaluation publicly accessible, e.g., through a GitHub repository or an alternative that is likely to remain available. There will be an artifact evaluation process, as discussed below.

2. New Ideas and Vision Papers.

   We solicit short papers that present new ideas and visions. Such papers may describe new, unconventional model-driven engineering research positions or approaches that depart from standard practice. They can describe well-defined research ideas that are at an early stage of investigation. They could also provide new evidence to challenge common wisdom, present new unifying theories about existing modeling research that provides novel insight or that can lead to the development of new technologies or approaches, or apply modeling technology to radically new application areas.

   Evaluation Criteria: New ideas and vision papers will be assessed primarily on their level of originality and potential for impact on the field in terms of promoting innovative thinking. Hence, inadequacies in the state-of-the-art and the pertinence, correctness, and impact of the idea/vision must be described clearly, even though the new idea need not be fully worked out, and a fully detailed roadmap need not be presented.