CHI Submission
Run this audit before uploading to PCS (Precision Conference Solutions) — CHI does not
use OpenReview or CMT. Every date and cap below was read from the CHI 2027 Papers pages
on 2026-07-08 through search-engine renderings (direct fetches of chi2027.acm.org
were blocked in the verification environment); reopen the live pages before acting on
any number.
What the CHI 2027 cycle posted
- Full Papers deadline: Thursday, September 10, 2026, on PCS, including videos and
supplementary materials — CHI collects everything on one date, unlike venues with a
later supplement window. No separate abstract-registration deadline was found for
2027; confirm on the live page rather than assuming (待核实).
- Review format: the single-column ACM submission template (CHI has used
single-column reviewing since 2021). The two-column look happens later, in TAPS.
- Length is governed by words, not pages. The posted norm: roughly 5,000–8,000 words
for a typical paper (excluding references), submissions at or above 12,000 words
face extra scrutiny and desk rejection when the length is not justified, and papers of
about 5,000 words or fewer are welcomed as short papers reviewed with expectations
commensurate with their size. CHI's standing phrase is that a paper should be the
length appropriate to its contribution.
- The submission form requires you to designate a reviewing subcommittee (up to two
choices) — a strategic decision, not paperwork; see
chi-topic-selection.
- Anonymization is mandatory and extends beyond the PDF: supplemental materials and
external links to datasets or code repositories that reveal identity are posted
desk-reject grounds.
The anonymization trap specific to CHI
CHI's policy is anonymized review of an HCI paper, which creates leak channels that ML
venues rarely have: consent-form headers naming the lab, screenshots of a deployed
system showing a university logo, video figures with a narrator saying "at our
institution," OSF or GitHub links registered to a named account, and app-store pages
for the studied prototype. Cite your own prior studies in the third person and keep
the citation; scrub everything else.
# Mechanical pre-upload sweep on the PCS package
pdfinfo paper.pdf | grep -Ei 'author|creator|producer' # PDF metadata identity
pdftotext paper.pdf - | grep -nEi 'github|osf\.io|our (lab|university|institution)' | head
texcount -inc -sum main.tex | tail -3 # word count vs the norms
ffprobe -v error -show_entries format=duration,size video-figure.mp4 # video sanity
unzip -l supplement.zip | grep -Ei 'consent|irb|ethics|\.git/' | head # named forms
Treat consent forms and ethics-approval letters as the highest-risk files: they carry
institution names by design, so upload templated, de-identified versions.
Desk-reject triage, CHI edition
CHI 2026 formalized an assisted desk reject step run jointly by subcommittee chairs
and ACs, with expanded criteria — desk screening is now a real stage, not a formality.
| Finding at audit time |
CHI severity |
Realistic fix |
| Wrong template or altered format |
Desk reject |
Recompile on the current ACM single-column class |
| Identity leak in PDF, supplement, or link |
Desk reject |
De-identify; replace links with anonymized archives |
| ~12,000+ words without justification |
Desk reject risk |
Cut or explicitly justify length in the submission |
| No plausible HCI contribution for any subcommittee |
Desk reject at SC/PC screening |
Re-frame or re-route before the deadline |
| Video figure missing captions |
Review-stage damage |
Add a .srt/.sbv file (see chi-supplementary) |
| Weak subcommittee match |
Quiet mis-review |
Change the designation, not the paper, if the work is sound |
Deadline-week order of operations
- Lock the subcommittee pair first; it determines who reads everything else.
- Freeze the manuscript at a defensible word count and record the
texcount output.
- Render and caption the video figure early — encoding and captioning always take
longer than the writing team budgets.
- Assemble supplements from a clean export, then run the mechanical sweep above on the
exact files going into PCS.
- Fill every PCS field (title, abstract, authors, subcommittees, contribution
statement fields if asked) a day before; PCS has no post-deadline mercy.
- Re-download the submitted package and open it cold, the way a 1AC will.
Length is an argument, not a quota
Because CHI reviews words against contribution, padding is a visible defect: a 9,500
word paper whose study supports 7,000 words of claims reads as inflated, and reviewers
say so. Cut the third restatement of the findings, move instrument details to the
supplement, and keep the method section exactly as long as replication requires — no
longer.
Cycle-volatile items — reverify every year
- The September date, the no-abstract-deadline reading, and all word-count wording.
- Subcommittee list and count for the live cycle (the 2026 list is posted on
chi2026.acm.org; the 2027 list was not yet published at check time — 待核实).
- Desk-reject criteria wording, which changed as recently as August 2025.
- Whether PCS asks new form questions (AI-use disclosure, data-availability fields).
Output format
[CHI submission status] ready / blocked / needs work
[Word count] <n> words vs posted norms; justification needed? yes/no
[Subcommittees] first: <name> / second: <name or none>
[Anonymity sweep] clean / leaks: <pdf | supplement | links | video | forms>
[Desk-reject exposure] <highest-risk item>
[Fix queue] <ordered actions before September upload>
1---2name: chi-submission3description: Use when auditing an ACM CHI Papers submission for PCS readiness, covering the September full-paper deadline, the anonymized single-column template, word-count norms instead of page limits, subcommittee designation, supplementary and video upload, anonymization of external links, and CHI's desk-reject triage before upload.4---56# CHI Submission78Run this audit before uploading to PCS (Precision Conference Solutions) — CHI does not9use OpenReview or CMT. Every date and cap below was read from the CHI 2027 Papers pages10on 2026-07-08 through search-engine renderings (direct fetches of `chi2027.acm.org`11were blocked in the verification environment); reopen the live pages before acting on12any number.1314## What the CHI 2027 cycle posted1516- Full Papers deadline: **Thursday, September 10, 2026**, on PCS, *including videos and17 supplementary materials* — CHI collects everything on one date, unlike venues with a18 later supplement window. No separate abstract-registration deadline was found for19 2027; confirm on the live page rather than assuming (待核实).20- Review format: the **single-column** ACM submission template (CHI has used21 single-column reviewing since 2021). The two-column look happens later, in TAPS.22- Length is governed by words, not pages. The posted norm: roughly **5,000–8,000 words**23 for a typical paper (excluding references), submissions at or above **12,000 words**24 face extra scrutiny and desk rejection when the length is not justified, and papers of25 about 5,000 words or fewer are welcomed as short papers reviewed with expectations26 commensurate with their size. CHI's standing phrase is that a paper should be the27 length appropriate to its contribution.28- The submission form requires you to designate a reviewing **subcommittee** (up to two29 choices) — a strategic decision, not paperwork; see `chi-topic-selection`.30- Anonymization is mandatory and extends beyond the PDF: supplemental materials and31 **external links to datasets or code repositories** that reveal identity are posted32 desk-reject grounds.3334## The anonymization trap specific to CHI3536CHI's policy is anonymized review of an HCI paper, which creates leak channels that ML37venues rarely have: consent-form headers naming the lab, screenshots of a deployed38system showing a university logo, video figures with a narrator saying "at our39institution," OSF or GitHub links registered to a named account, and app-store pages40for the studied prototype. Cite your own prior studies in the third person and keep41the citation; scrub everything else.4243```bash44# Mechanical pre-upload sweep on the PCS package45pdfinfo paper.pdf | grep -Ei 'author|creator|producer' # PDF metadata identity46pdftotext paper.pdf - | grep -nEi 'github|osf\.io|our (lab|university|institution)' | head47texcount -inc -sum main.tex | tail -3 # word count vs the norms48ffprobe -v error -show_entries format=duration,size video-figure.mp4 # video sanity49unzip -l supplement.zip | grep -Ei 'consent|irb|ethics|\.git/' | head # named forms50```5152Treat consent forms and ethics-approval letters as the highest-risk files: they carry53institution names by design, so upload templated, de-identified versions.5455## Desk-reject triage, CHI edition5657CHI 2026 formalized an *assisted desk reject* step run jointly by subcommittee chairs58and ACs, with expanded criteria — desk screening is now a real stage, not a formality.5960| Finding at audit time | CHI severity | Realistic fix |61|---|---|---|62| Wrong template or altered format | Desk reject | Recompile on the current ACM single-column class |63| Identity leak in PDF, supplement, or link | Desk reject | De-identify; replace links with anonymized archives |64| ~12,000+ words without justification | Desk reject risk | Cut or explicitly justify length in the submission |65| No plausible HCI contribution for any subcommittee | Desk reject at SC/PC screening | Re-frame or re-route before the deadline |66| Video figure missing captions | Review-stage damage | Add a .srt/.sbv file (see `chi-supplementary`) |67| Weak subcommittee match | Quiet mis-review | Change the designation, not the paper, if the work is sound |6869## Deadline-week order of operations70711. Lock the subcommittee pair first; it determines who reads everything else.722. Freeze the manuscript at a defensible word count and record the `texcount` output.733. Render and caption the video figure early — encoding and captioning always take74 longer than the writing team budgets.754. Assemble supplements from a clean export, then run the mechanical sweep above on the76 exact files going into PCS.775. Fill every PCS field (title, abstract, authors, subcommittees, contribution78 statement fields if asked) a day before; PCS has no post-deadline mercy.796. Re-download the submitted package and open it cold, the way a 1AC will.8081## Length is an argument, not a quota8283Because CHI reviews words against contribution, padding is a visible defect: a 9,50084word paper whose study supports 7,000 words of claims reads as inflated, and reviewers85say so. Cut the third restatement of the findings, move instrument details to the86supplement, and keep the method section exactly as long as replication requires — no87longer.8889## Cycle-volatile items — reverify every year9091- The September date, the no-abstract-deadline reading, and all word-count wording.92- Subcommittee list and count for the live cycle (the 2026 list is posted on93 chi2026.acm.org; the 2027 list was not yet published at check time — 待核实).94- Desk-reject criteria wording, which changed as recently as August 2025.95- Whether PCS asks new form questions (AI-use disclosure, data-availability fields).9697## Output format9899```text100[CHI submission status] ready / blocked / needs work101[Word count] <n> words vs posted norms; justification needed? yes/no102[Subcommittees] first: <name> / second: <name or none>103[Anonymity sweep] clean / leaks: <pdf | supplement | links | video | forms>104[Desk-reject exposure] <highest-risk item>105[Fix queue] <ordered actions before September upload>106```