Use the conference’s current call for papers, submission system, and track-specific instructions as the authority for your final check. Formatting and anonymity rules vary by venue, track, review stage, and year; examples below illustrate what to inspect, not rules you can apply everywhere.
1. Find the instructions that govern your submission
Start with the current call for papers and submission instructions for the exact conference track and review stage. Do not carry requirements over from an earlier year or another event without confirming them.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
- Is review single-blind or double-blind? Is anonymization required, optional, or different at a later review stage?
- Which template and formatting rules apply? Confirm page or word limits, file type, required sections, and rules for references, appendices, and supplementary files.
- Does the track have additional instructions, or does the submission system specify a separate process?
Rules can differ even across major publishers and events. IEEE VIS 2025 referenced TVCG formatting and described double-blind submission as an option in some situations; ACM Multimedia 2025 specified an ACM template and an anonymous LaTeX option for tracks requiring anonymity. Those examples are not substitutes for your event’s current instructions. (IEEE VIS 2025; ACM Multimedia 2025)
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →2. Check the paper against the required format
Use the conference’s specified template, not a template chosen merely because it comes from the same publisher. ACM’s general template is a manuscript template with instructions included in the document; a conference may prescribe its own variant. Do not assume ACM and IEEE requirements are interchangeable, or that a journal format applies, unless the conference says so. (ACM submission template; IEEE VIS 2025 format guidance)
#1 Best Overall
Compare the rendered paper with the requirements, checking:
- Page or word count, including whether references, appendices, or supplementary material count toward a limit.
- Page size, margins, columns, font size, spacing, and title and abstract placement.
- Required sections and the placement and legibility of figures, tables, captions, and references.
- File type and any separate format rules for appendices or supplements.
Follow the exact definitions and exceptions in the call. A paper that looks similar to the template can still exceed a limit or omit a required element.
3. Run a checker, then verify its output
If the conference or submission system provides a formatting checker, use the named tool and read its current documentation. Treat its result as a diagnostic, not as a compliance certificate: it may miss a problem or flag something that is permitted. An IPSN 2014 submission page, for example, described its checker as heuristic and said false positives could occur; that is a historical illustration, not guidance about a current checker. (IPSN 2014 submission instructions)
Review each warning against the current conference rules and the PDF itself. If no checker is provided, perform the same comparison manually. Passing a checker does not establish that the paper meets every requirement.
Rank #3
- Author & Edition: Written by Paul J. Silvia; this is the second edition (2018) of the popular guidebook.
- Purpose: Offers practical strategies to help academics overcome barriers to writing and increase productivity.
- Audience: Targeted at students, professors, researchers, and other academics across disciplines.
- Content Highlights: Addresses common excuses, bad writing habits, and provides methods to write, submit, and revise journal articles, books, and proposals.
- New Features in 2nd Edition: Updated tips for academic writing and a new chapter on writing grant and fellowship proposals.
4. Make a separate anonymity pass if the review is anonymous
Search the manuscript and inspect every rendered page for information that could identify the authors. Anonymity checks should include more than the author line:
- Names, affiliations, email addresses, institution names, running titles, headers, footers, and footnotes.
- Acknowledgments, grant numbers, funder names, and other funding details.
- Descriptions of a lab, location, participant group, or study procedure that reveal an institution or research team unnecessarily.
- Names or identifying marks embedded in figures, screenshots, image labels, and captions.
- Supplementary files and external links that reveal ownership, account names, or institutional affiliation.
CHI 2025 guidance identifies metadata, acknowledgments, funders, detailed study descriptions, and supplementary links as possible disclosure points. HRI guidance also calls out identifying marks in images and supplementary materials. Inspect linked content as a reviewer could encounter it, rather than checking only the PDF. (CHI 2025 anonymous submission policy; HRI author checklist)
Rank #4
Do not strip useful scientific context automatically. Some guidance recognizes that anonymity can conflict with clarity; apply the target event’s instructions to decide what must be obscured. (IEEE VIS 2025 paper guidance)
5. Handle self-citations and file metadata according to venue rules
Do not automatically delete citations to your own work. Several venue guides advise keeping relevant citations while writing about prior work in the third person—for example, “Smith et al. found…” rather than “in our previous work.” IEEE Secure Development’s 2025 FAQ and HRI guidance describe this approach, but the target conference’s instructions control. (IEEE Secure Development 2025 FAQ; HRI author checklist)
Check document properties and exported PDF metadata for author names or other identifying fields when anonymization is required. Also inspect the source document and supplements: a clean author line in the PDF does not guarantee the file properties or attachments are anonymous. Follow the conference’s stated metadata and submission-system rules. (CHI 2025 anonymous submission policy)
Quick Recap
6. Inspect the exact files and information you will submit
- Export the final PDF using the required settings and open that exported file.
- Check page count, layout, legibility, figures, captions, references, and any changes made for anonymity.
- Open each supplement and follow each external link as a reviewer might; verify that the content and access settings do not disclose identity contrary to the rules.
- In the submission system, attach the correct file to the correct track. Enter title and author information according to the system’s separate instructions, which may differ from the anonymized manuscript requirements.
- After the last edit, export and inspect the PDF again. Keep the source file and final upload consistent with the required review mode.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
