# Facct Supplementary > Use when deciding what belongs in an ACM FAccT paper body versus its endmatter statements, appendices, and supplementary material — the 14-page acmart budget, the extra endmatter page for ethics/adverse-impacts statements, the rule that decision-critical evidence stays in the reviewed pages, mutually-anonymous supplementary material, and how to split an interdisciplinary paper between body, endmatter, and artifact. - Skill: `thedixitjain/facct-supplementary` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add thedixitjain/facct-supplementary` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/thedixitjain/facct-supplementary/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Finance & Business - Author: thedixitjain (https://skillmd.com/u/thedixitjain) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/thedixitjain/facct-supplementary --- # FAccT Supplementary Use this when assembling FAccT supplementary material. Two rules govern the split. First, the familiar one: **the paper must be judgeable from the reviewed pages alone** — appendices and released artifacts support the paper, they do not hold the argument. Second, the FAccT-specific one: the **endmatter statements** (Generative AI Usage, Ethical Considerations, Adverse Impacts, Positionality) are a distinct zone with their own page allowance and their own anonymity rules — get that zone right or risk a policy problem independent of the paper's quality. ## The three zones | Zone | Counts toward the 14-page limit? | Anonymity at submission | |---|---|---| | Body (intro → limitations) | Yes (up to 14; 15 if Revised/accepted) | Anonymous | | Endmatter statements | No — one extra content page allowed | Mixed (see below) | | Appendix / supplementary / released artifact | Per current CFP — confirm | Anonymous; strip metadata | ## What goes where | Content | Body (within budget) | Endmatter | Appendix / artifact | |---|---|---|---| | The FAccT contribution and who is affected | Yes | — | — | | Core method / study design / argument | Yes | — | Full parameter grids, extra config | | Headline disaggregated results + limitations | Yes | — | Full result tables, secondary breakdowns | | Ethical Considerations, Adverse Impacts | — | Yes | — | | Generative AI Usage Statement | — | Yes (required) | — | | Positionality, Acknowledgements, Author Contributions | — | Yes — **only upon acceptance** | — | | Interview protocol, full codebook, datasheet | Summary + key themes in body | — | Yes | | Raw data, analysis scripts | — | — | Yes | If a reviewer would need to open the appendix to know whether the harm is real or the method is sound, the paper is mis-partitioned — move that evidence into the body. ## The endmatter zone (FAccT-specific, easy to get wrong) ```text [Generative AI Usage] REQUIRED for every submission: state whether/how generative AI was used; FAccT prohibits wholesale AI-generated manuscript text [Ethical Considerations] the concerns you faced and how you addressed them (safe to include anonymized) [Adverse Impacts] foreseeable unintended harms once published/deployed, and mitigations [Positionality] how the authors' background shapes the work — IDENTITY-REVEALING, so add ONLY upon acceptance; keep it OUT of the anonymous submission [Author Contributions / Acknowledgements / Competing Interests] also identity-revealing -> acceptance only ``` The extra endmatter page does **not** count against the 14-page limit, so a strong ethics/adverse- impacts treatment costs you nothing in body space — write it properly rather than cramming a sentence into the conclusion. ## Mutually-anonymous supplementary rules ```text [No identity] no authors, affiliations, acknowledgements, funding, cluster paths, or repo owners anywhere in the appendix, artifact, or the statements you DO include at submission [No positionality] the positionality/acks/contributions statements are withheld until acceptance [Anonymized links] any released code/data link points at an anonymizing host, not a personal repo [Clean archive] no .git history, .DS_Store, credentials, caches, or participant-identifying files [Opens clean] verify the archive unzips and a README orients a reader in one minute ``` ## Vignette: splitting a mixed-methods paper A paper auditing a system plus interviewing affected users: the body keeps the contribution, the study design, the headline **disaggregated** results with uncertainty, the key qualitative themes, and a limitations subsection; the endmatter carries the required Generative AI Usage Statement, an Ethical Considerations statement about the consent and re-harm risks, and an Adverse Impacts statement about how the audit could be misused — with Positionality held for the accepted version. The appendix/artifact holds the analysis code, the datasheet, the full codebook, and the interview protocol. Nothing decision-critical lives only in the appendix. ## Output format ```text [Supplement status] ready / needs fixes / not ready [Partition check] anything decision-critical outside the body? [Page budget] body within limit? endmatter on its allowed extra page? yes/no [Endmatter] [Anonymity] archive + included statements clean of identity + metadata? passed/issues ``` --- **Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `FAccT-Skills/skills/facct-supplementary/SKILL.md`