chi-supplementary

CHI Supplementary Materials

CHI collects the paper, the video figure, and every supplementary file **together on

the one submission deadline** (September 10, 2026 for CHI 2027, per chi2027.acm.org,

read 2026-07-08). There is no later supplement slot, so supplement production is

deadline-week work that must be scheduled like writing. Everything uploaded is part

of the anonymous review record; everything accepted ships to the ACM Digital Library

beside the paper, permanently.

What goes where

| Material | Phase | Governing rule |

|---|---|---|

| Video figure (≤ ~5 min, illustrates the work) | With submission | Anonymized; closed captions required |

| Appendices (instruments, extra tables, prompts) | With submission | Reviewed at reviewer discretion; paper must stand alone |

| Code / data archive | With submission | De-identified, anonymous, no .git history |

| Consent/IRB templates | With submission | Templated versions only — these files name institutions by design |

| Video preview (~30 s pitch) | Camera-ready (publication-ready deadline) | Accepted papers only; captioned; goes to DL and program |

| Final supplements | Publication-ready deadline | De-anonymized, captioned, archival quality |

The self-containment rule cuts across all of it: reviewers must be able to judge the

contribution from the PDF alone. Supplements deepen; they never carry a load-bearing

result.

The video figure

SIGCHI's video guide (sigchi.org/resources/guides-for-authors/videos/) sets the

expectations this pack verifies: video figures illustrate key aspects of the work,

run up to about five minutes, are archived in the DL, and **every video needs a

closed-caption file** (SRT, SBV, or VTT). Craft rules that survive review:

• Show the interaction, not slides. Thirty seconds of real use beats two minutes of

bullet points read aloud.

• Leave titles on screen long enough to read (the guide suggests up to ~10 seconds

for video figures).

• Anonymize the audio track too: no narrator saying the lab's name, no institutional

logos on walls or screens, no identifiable bystanders, and consent for every

visible participant — including for eventual public archiving, not just review.

• Write the caption transcript yourself (or correct an auto-transcript line by

line); auto-captions mangle technical vocabulary exactly where precision matters.

• Audio-describe or narrate what matters visually: the captions plus narration

should let a listener who cannot see the screen follow the contribution.

# Video figure QA before PCS upload
ffprobe -v error -show_entries format=duration,size -of default=nw=1 videofigure.mp4
ffmpeg -i videofigure.mp4 -i videofigure.srt -c copy -c:s mov_text captioned.mp4
ffprobe -v error -select_streams s -show_entries stream=codec_name captioned.mp4  # captions present?
# Archive hygiene for the code/data supplement
zip -r supplement.zip supplement/ -x '*.git*' '*.DS_Store' '*node_modules*'
unzip -l supplement.zip | grep -Ei 'consent|irb|\.env|id_rsa|\.key' && echo "PURGE THESE"

Anonymization has more surface area here than in the paper

The PDF gets proofread; supplements leak. Recurring channels, all desk-reject grade

(chi-submission): PDF/Office metadata inside appendix files, .git histories with

author emails, notebook outputs showing home-directory paths with usernames, OSF or

GitHub links registered to named accounts (use the platforms' anonymous-view

mechanisms), app-store links for the studied prototype, and consent forms with

letterhead. Sweep the exact files being uploaded, not the working copies.

Structure the archive for a tired reviewer

One README at the root, mapping files to paper sections; instruments in one

folder; data dictionary beside the data; a one-command entry point for any code

(chi-reproducibility holds the transparency ladder). A reviewer gives the archive

five minutes — spend your effort on the first five minutes.

The video preview (after acceptance)

The ~30-second preview is optional but disproportionately valuable: it plays on

YouTube and beside the DL record, and is how conference attendees choose sessions.

One idea, one strong visual, captioned, titles readable in ~4 seconds per the guide.

Produce it in February against the publication-ready deadline (2027-02-18), when the

camera-ready is stable — not in deadline-week September (chi-camera-ready).

Cycle-volatile items

File-size caps and accepted formats for PCS uploads, whether the current cycle asks

for specific supplement manifests, and any per-subcommittee expectations were 待核实

at check time — read the live "Guide to a Successful Submission" and video pages for

the cycle before finalizing the package.

Output format

[Package] video figure ✓/✗ (captions ✓/✗) · appendix ✓/✗ · code/data ✓/✗ · README ✓/✗
[Self-containment] paper stands without supplements: yes/no
[Anonymity sweep] metadata · git history · links · audio track · footage consent — clean?
[Consent coverage] archival publication consent for all visible participants: yes/no
[Deferred to camera-ready] video preview · de-anonymized archives
[Blocking issue] <what stops upload today>