cvpr-workflow

CVPR Workflow

CVPR is an annual machine with one intake: in the 2026 cycle, abstracts November 6,

papers November 13, supplements November 20, rebuttal late January, decisions

February 20, conference June 3–7 in Denver. This skill turns that spine into a

project plan with owners, because CVPR deadline weeks are lost to coordination

failures more often than to science failures.

Campaign calendar (2026-cycle anchors)

| When | Milestone | Owner discipline |

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

| T–10 weeks (early Sep) | Freeze scope: claims, benchmarks, baselines | PI + first author sign one paragraph |

| T–8 weeks | Experiment matrix running; recipe ledger live | Every table row has a config |

| T–6 weeks | First full draft; flip-test the figures | Co-authors annotate, don't rewrite |

| T–4 weeks (early Oct) | OpenReview profiles audited for every author | One named owner; new coauthors close the list |

| T–1 week (Nov 6) | Abstract registered; profiles valid | Desk-reject exposure if missed |

| Nov 13 | Paper + CRF submitted | Freeze 24h early; upload before the panic hour |

| Nov 20 | Supplement uploaded | Videos/code packaged per cvpr-supplementary |

| Dec – Jan 12 | Coauthors deliver their assigned reviews | Late reviews endanger your paper |

| Jan 22–29 | Reviews land; one-page rebuttal | Pre-book this week; nobody travels |

| Jan 30 – Feb 5 | Discussion (no author access) | Resist mailing the AC |

| Feb 20 | Decisions | Both branches pre-planned |

| Spring (待核实) | Camera-ready + dataset release due | See cvpr-camera-ready |

| Jun 3–7 | Conference (workshops 3–4, main 5–7 in 2026) | Poster/talk/travel logistics |

The two windows people fail to defend

Deadline fortnight (early November). The supplement trailing the paper by a week

tempts teams to leave packaging "for week two" — then week two evaporates into video

rendering and code scrubbing. Rule: the supplement plan (what goes in, who builds it)

is written before the paper deadline; week two only executes it.

Rebuttal week (late January). Seven days, one page, all reviewers at once. Assign

roles when reviews drop, not after a day of group grief:

# rebuttal-roles.yaml — filled within 12 hours of review release
reader:        # summarizes all reviews neutrally, one page, no rebuttals yet
runner:        # owns the 1-2 small requested experiments; hard stop at day 5
writer:        # owns the single page; everyone else feeds bullets
adjudicator:   # PI decides which objections get space, which get one line
deadline:      # internal freeze 24h before OpenReview close

Reviewer duty as a planned workload

Submitting enrolls qualifying authors into a 25k-reviewer pool, and undelivered or

irresponsible reviews can desk-reject every paper the offender authored (verified 2026

enforcement). Treat December–January reviewing as a scheduled deliverable: at

submission time, list which coauthors are likely reviewers, block their calendar for

review weeks, and have the group's senior authors sanity-check first-time reviewers'

drafts against the official reviewer guidelines.

Multi-paper coordination

Most labs submit several papers into the same November wall, which multiplies the

process risks nonlinearly:

• Shared coauthors, shared exposure: one person's undelivered January review

endangers every paper they touch; the duty ledger must be lab-level, not

paper-level.

• Conflict hygiene: OpenReview conflicts must be complete across all submissions;

a stale institution on one profile pollutes assignments for the whole batch.

• Compute contention: rebuttal-week reserve GPU allocations collide when three

papers each promised "small requested experiments"; pre-negotiate priority order.

• Internal review: schedule lab-mates' cross-reads at T–10, not T–2 — at T–2

everyone is defending their own draft.

The resubmission ladder

At a 25.42% acceptance rate, the rational plan covers rejection before it happens. The

CV calendar offers a clean ladder — CVPR (Nov) → ICCV (spring deadline, odd years) /

ECCV (spring deadline, even years) → WACV/3DV or back to CVPR. Rules for climbing:

• Bank the reviews: fix every factual objection before the next deadline; reviewer

pools overlap across CVF venues and repeat objections read badly (triage method in

cvpr-review-process).

• Mind the dual-submission windows: the CVPR attestation covered Nov 13 – Feb 20 in

2026; the next venue's window must not overlap a paper still under CVPR review.

• Re-check freshness: three months of arXiv can obsolete a comparison table; budget a

baseline-refresh pass, not just an edit pass.

Deadline fortnight, day by day

The last two weeks compress badly when run ad hoc. A schedule that has survived

contact with real teams:

• T–14 to T–10: results freeze for the main table. New numbers after this go to

the supplement or the rebuttal, not the body.

• T–10 to T–7: full-draft pass; run the figure flip test with an outsider; final

baseline-freshness check against the leaderboard.

• T–7 (abstract day): register the abstract, verify every profile renders as

complete when logged out of the authors' accounts, lock the author list.

• T–6 to T–3: claim-calibration pass (cvpr-writing-style), bibliography venue

verification (cvpr-related-work), CRF mandatory sections drafted.

• T–2: full mechanical sweep from cvpr-submission; internal freeze.
• T–1: upload; re-download; cold read. Nobody edits after upload day.
• T to T+7 (supplement week): execute — do not design — the supplement plan;

identity-scan code and videos; upload at T+5, not T+7, to survive a failed render.

Cycle-status note

As of 2026-07-08, CVPR 2026 has concluded and the CVPR 2027 cycle (Seattle, reported

around June 20–24, 2027) had published no CFP or deadlines. Every date above is a

2026-cycle anchor for planning shape only — reopen cvpr.thecvf.com the moment your team

commits, because the deadline chain (and things like the CRF) can change between

editions.

Output format

[Campaign stage] scoping / building / deadline-fortnight / in-review / rebuttal / decided
[Calendar] next 3 milestones with dates and owners
[Duty ledger] reviewing coauthors + calendar blocked: yes/no
[Risk register] top 3 (missed-profile, supplement drift, rebuttal roles, …)
[Plan B] next venue + its verified deadline
[Cycle check] current-year pages reopened on: <date>