Welcome to SIGGRAPH 2023

SIGGRAPH Technical Papers Anonymity Policy

Hero Image

The SIGGRAPH Technical Papers Program strives to maintain a fair and equitable, doubly anonymous review process. As such, we ask the authors to minimize the chances that the reviewers will recognize the submission authors based on information available online. At the same time, we understand that certain communities have a culture of early dissemination, and in some instances keeping author information confidential can impose undue hardship.

Based on the above principles, the following are considered violations of the review process if they occur during the review process, i.e., from one month before the submission deadline (that is, starting 25 December 2022 for SIGGRAPH 2023) till the submission is officially accepted (final version approved by the senior reviewer), or the authors are notified that the submission is rejected:

  1. Listing SIGGRAPH submissions or prepublications (arxiv, institutional tech reports, …) of these submissions on authors’ individual or institutional webpages.
  2. Generating any publicity for the submitted works via university or company PR teams or channels.
  3. Publicizing the submitted work in external talks (unless it is a job talk, see below).
  4. Generating any publicity for the submitted works via authors’ individual or institutional social media channels or other forms of media. This includes publishing any types of interviews with editors/journalists/writers/interviewers of newspapers, radio, television, or magazines, as well as public relations and media arms of companies, universities, and other research institutions.
  5. Publicly replying or acknowledging authorship in response to any social media posts by others regarding the submitted work.
  6. Creating public code or data repositories corresponding to the submission that allow determining the author’s identity (e.g., by listing the author name, or through the username).

Based on the above principles, the following are NOT considered a violation of the review process rules, as long as the respective conditions are satisfied:

  1. Archiving the submission (as a way to get a timestamp) as an institutional tech report, or a preprint on arXiv or a similar service, before or after the submission deadline is allowed. However, the submission webpage or manuscript should not state anywhere that the submission is under review for SIGGRAPH. In particular, it should not include the submission ID or use the ACM TOG/ACM conference format (this refers to conference name, copyright, etc., not to the choice of fonts, margins, or column layout).
  2. Unlisted YouTube videos linked to an ArXiv submission are allowed. Such videos should not include submission ids or author information.
  3. Anonymous code or data repositories, i.e., ones where the author’s identity cannot be determined through username or other means, either stand-alone or linked to an ArXiv submission, are allowed.
  4. Authors can list submissions as “under review at SIGGRAPH” as part of the written materials submitted for job, school, and funding applications. They can also discuss them during job interviews and job interview talks.
  5. Authors can privately reply to submission-related queries submitted via social media. The replies should not be publicly visible.

If the technical papers committee is made aware of a potential violation of any of these guidelines, the case will be forwarded to a policy committee which will determine if a violation has occurred and if, consequently, the paper in question should be desk rejected.