icse-submission

ICSE Submission

Run this audit before touching the submit button on the ICSE HotCRP site. Every

number below was read from the ICSE 2027 Research Track pages on 2026-07-08 (via

search renderings of the official conf.researchr.org URLs — see

resources/official-source-map.md); treat them as one cycle's snapshot and reopen

the live call before acting.

The 2027-cycle mechanics

• Two deadlines, both AoE (23:59:59, UTC-12). The abstract deadline

(June 23, 2026) is mandatory — no abstract in HotCRP by that date, no paper

submission a week later (June 30, 2026). ICSE uses the abstract for bidding

and PC assignment, so a placeholder abstract that drifts from the final paper

quietly damages your reviewer match.

• 10 + 2 page format. Main text ≤ 10 pages *inclusive of all figures, tables,

and appendices*; up to 2 additional pages may contain only references.

There is no unlimited appendix: anything reviewers must see lives inside the 10.

• IEEE conference template, unmodified. Title in 24pt, body in 10pt —

\documentclass[10pt,conference]{IEEEtran}, without compsoc options. The

call states that spacing/font alterations can mean desk rejection without review.

• Submission site: icse2027.hotcrp.com, one HotCRP instance per track.

Double-anonymous sweep

ICSE reviews double-anonymously: the submission may not reveal author identity,

and your own prior work is cited in the third person. Because SE papers lean on

tools and repositories, the leak surface is wider than the author block:

# Mechanical pass on the submission PDF and any supplementary archive
pdfinfo paper.pdf | grep -Ei 'author|creator|producer'
pdftotext paper.pdf - | grep -nEi 'github\.com/[a-z0-9-]+|gitlab|zenodo\.org/record|acknowledg|grant' | head
unzip -l supplement.zip | grep -Ei '\.git/|\.DS_Store|/home/|/Users/' | head
grep -rn "university\|@.*\.edu" supplement/ --include='*.md' | head

The SE-specific leaks: a tool named after your lab, screenshots showing a

username, a replication link pointing at a personal GitHub, commit metadata

inside a zipped repository, and issue-tracker URLs in the evaluation section.

Re-host artifacts behind an anonymizing service before upload, not after.

Open science at submission time

The research track is governed by the ICSE Open Science policy: sharing is the

expected default, and non-sharing is what needs justification. Concretely for

the submission:

• Provide anonymized links to data/repositories, or upload anonymized material

through HotCRP's supplementary option.

• If you cannot share, add a short Data Availability section after the

Conclusion explaining why (industrial confidentiality, human-subjects limits).

• Sharing is not formally mandatory for acceptance — but the Verifiability and

Transparency criterion is one of the four scored criteria, so an empty

availability story is a scored weakness, not a neutral choice.

Desk-risk triage

| Finding at audit time | Severity | Real fix |

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

| Main text spills to page 11 | Desk-reject-grade | Cut content or move it to the artifact; the 2 extra pages are references-only |

| Template tampering (margins, 9.5pt body) | Explicitly named desk-reject ground | Recompile clean; recover space editorially |

| Identity leak in PDF or supplement | Anonymity violation | Re-anonymize and re-host; check PDF metadata too |

| Abstract not registered by June 23 | No submission slot exists | Nothing fixes this after AoE — calendar it now |

| No availability statement, no artifact | Scored against verifiability | Add Data Availability section + anonymized package |

| Same study under review elsewhere | Dual-submission exposure | Withdraw one venue first; verify the current policy wording |

Final-week order of operations

1. Freeze the 10-page body early; references can churn, the body cannot.
2. Register the abstract well before June 23 with the real title and abstract.
3. Build the anonymized replication package and place its link in the paper.
4. Run the mechanical anonymity checks on the final PDF, not a draft.
5. Fill every HotCRP field (topics, conflicts, coauthors with correct emails)

a day early — conflicts entered late are the classic AoE-midnight failure.

1. Re-download your submission from HotCRP and read it cold, checking that the

PDF that uploaded is the PDF you meant.

What the form asks that the paper does not

HotCRP topic selections drive which PC members bid on you. Choose topics that

match your evidence, not your ambitions: a paper tagged "machine learning for

SE" plus "human factors" gets one reviewer from each pool, and the mismatched

one writes the low score. Declare conflicts for every coauthor's institution

and recent collaborators; ICSE PCs are large, and an undeclared conflict found

later is a chair-level problem.

IEEEtran traps that surface at upload

Three template failures recur in SE submissions specifically: bibliography

styles that silently exceed the reference pages when dblp entries carry long

venue strings (abbreviate via the .bib, not by shrinking the font);

listings/minted code blocks whose captured line widths overflow the

column and get "fixed" with negative \hspace — a tampering signal; and

figures exported from dashboards at screen resolution that balloon the PDF

and blur in print. Budget a compile-and-print test on the true template a

week out, because each of these costs hours exactly when you have none.

Reverify each cycle

• Deadlines and whether the cycle count changes again (2025–2026 ran two

cycles; 2027 posts one).

• Page budget and template (10+2 and IEEEtran were the 2027 numbers).
• Supplementary handling, AI-use disclosure rules, and dual-submission wording

— all 待核实 per cycle; none should be assumed stable.

Output format

[ICSE submission status] ready / blocked / needs work
[Format] pages used (main/refs), template compliance
[Anonymity] clean / leaks: <where>
[Open science] artifact link present? availability statement present?
[HotCRP] abstract registered, topics, conflicts, coauthors
[Fix queue] <ordered, with owners and dates before June 30 AoE>