Review Process

Authors must omit names and institutions and remove identifying material from the submitted paper. Refer to the authors' own related work in the third person. The goal is to make a serious anonymization effort without requiring authors to hide the existence of relevant prior work. Additional instructions for preprints, appendices, and supplemental material will be published before submissions open.

The coordinated program committee will evaluate technical soundness and contribution, relevance to the selected track or tracks and the conference, clarity of presentation, significance and likely impact, and verifiability of claims. The same criteria apply to Regular and Short papers in light of each category's intended scope.

After initial reviews, authors may use the confirmed author-response period to correct factual errors, answer reviewer questions, and point to evidence already present in the submitted paper or supplement. The response must preserve anonymity and must not introduce new research results or a revised paper. Detailed response instructions, including any length limit, will appear in the submission system before the period opens.

The planned process is for reviewers and unconflicted program-committee leadership to consider the submitted paper, reviews, and author response during online discussion before decisions. Detailed discussion and decision procedures remain forthcoming. Authors will receive the decision and the author-visible reviews on the confirmed notification date. Presentation details for accepted papers remain forthcoming.