On the first day, the panel on Academic Writing started with two amazing talks: "What makes a paper great from the reviewer’s perspective?" by Jari Saramaki, and the other, "How to get your paper rejected – An editor’s perspective" by Ingo Scholtes.

Later on, we engaged in a lively discussion with our distinguished speakers, the panelists Elisa Omodei, Martina Contisciani, two editors Jacopo Fregoni and Leonardo Benini, and of course, the audience.

Many topics were discussed, but the most debated one centered on the question of who should give the guidelines for the publication process: should it be the editors or the scientific community at large? While a consensus emerged that reforms in the review process are needed, the path to achieving these changes remains an ongoing and open challenge. Will AI lend a hand in tackling this problem?

On the second day, the topic was mental well-being in Academia. We started with our first speaker, Jana Lasser, who talked about "Power abuse in academia – problem description and suggestions for solutions". Next, Tobias Galla talked about reducing frustration, but in a sarcastic manner, as you may deduce from the title of his talk: "How to achieve maximum frustration during your PhD".

As on the previous day, the talks were followed by an open discussion with the speakers, the two panelists, Simone Daniotti and Hannah Metzler, and the audience.