ieeesp-workflow

IEEE S&P Workflow

Use this to run a project against S&P's calendar. Unlike single-deadline ML

venues, each S&P symposium accepts papers through **multiple submission

cycles**, each a self-contained mini-conference with its own HotCRP site,

registration freeze, review rounds, and decision date. Planning means choosing

a cycle, not "the deadline."

The S&P 2027 cycle map (checked 2026-07-08, all dates 待核实 before use)

| Milestone | Cycle 1 | Cycle 2 |

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

| Abstract registration (title/abstract/authors/ORCIDs frozen) | Jun 5, 2026, 7:59:59 AM EDT | Nov 10, 2026 |

| Full paper due | Jun 12, 2026 | Nov 17, 2026 |

| Early-reject notification | 待核实 | Jan 18, 2027 |

| Reviews released to surviving papers | 待核实 | Feb 11, 2027 |

| Rebuttal due | 待核实 | Feb 16, 2027 |

| Decision (Accept / Revise / Reject) | 待核实 | Mar 5, 2027 |

| Symposium (Montreal, Canada) | May 2027 | May 2027 |

Two planning facts bite hardest. First, **Cycle 1 for 2027 closed on June 12,

2026** — as of this pack's check date the open path is Cycle 2. Second, S&P

states deadlines in a fixed clock time (7:59:59 AM EDT for Cycle 1), **not

AoE**; a team assuming Anywhere-on-Earth loses most of a day.

Registration week is the real deadline

At S&P, the registration deadline is substantive: the final title, complete

abstract, full author list with ORCIDs, and declared conflicts are locked on

HotCRP one week before the paper is due, and none of it may change afterwards.

ORCID records must match HotCRP names and emails or the paper is desk

rejected. Treat registration week as the week author-list politics, ORCID

housekeeping, and conflict declarations get resolved — not deadline night.

Backward schedule from a cycle

T-16w  Threat model + evidence plan frozen (ieeesp-topic-selection)
T-12w  Core exploit / adaptive evaluation / measurement running
T-8w   Ethics work: disclosure sent to vendors, IRB determination
       in hand — these have external latency you cannot compress
T-4w   Full draft; internal adversarial read by a non-author
T-1w   REGISTRATION: title, abstract, authors+ORCIDs, conflicts,
       Ethics Considerations field on HotCRP — then frozen
T-0    Paper upload (13 pages + ≤5 refs/appendix, compsoc template)
T+~9w  Early-reject notice; if surviving: reviews + 5-day rebuttal
T+~16w Decision: Accept (shepherded camera-ready) / Revise / Reject

The item teams misplace is the ethics latency at T-8w: responsible-disclosure

clocks and IRB reviews run on other institutions' calendars, and the

registration-time Ethics Considerations field must describe work already done,

not intentions.

Branch plans for the three outcomes

• Accept — expect a draft meta-review plus a shepherd who checks concerns

off as the camera-ready resolves them; budget real revision time, not a

formatting pass (ieeesp-camera-ready).

• Revise — a structured major revision with a summary of expectations;

this is the venue's signature second chance. Plan it as a project with an

owner and a deadline, not as "address comments" (ieeesp-review-process).

• Reject — the one-year embargo runs from the original submission date,

and anything ≥~40% overlapping counts as a resubmission. The productive

branch is usually a sibling venue whose deadline falls inside the embargo

window.

Choosing between cycles

• Pick the later cycle when the adaptive evaluation or disclosure process

is incomplete — an early reject costs the venue for a year of that paper's

life, and first-round reviewers do not see rebuttals.

• Pick the earlier cycle when the work is done and a Revise outcome would

still land the paper in the same symposium year.

• Never plan on submitting the same work to two S&P cycles back-to-back

without checking the current CFP's resubmission wording — the embargo

applies across cycles, not just across years.

Standing risks to assign owners

| Risk | Owner action |

|---|---|

| Registration freeze missed | Calendar registration week, not paper week |

| Timezone misread (EDT vs AoE) | Convert official time on day one |

| Disclosure/IRB latency | Start at T-8w; log vendor contact dates |

| Embargo collision | Check prior S&P rejections before committing |

| Shepherd turnaround post-accept | Reserve author time in the decision month |

Output format

[Target] S&P <year>, Cycle <n> (registration <date>, paper <date>)
[Today→registration] <n> weeks; feasibility: on-track / tight / unrealistic
[Ethics latency] disclosure started? IRB determination? <status>
[Embargo] clear / blocked until <date>
[Branch plans] accept: <owner> · revise: <owner> · reject: <next venue>