Use this after acceptance. SIGMETRICS research papers are published as POMACS journal articles, so the camera-ready is a journal production step, and it runs through shepherding: an accepted paper is shepherded to ensure the reviewers' required changes land in the final version. Reopen the current POMACS author instructions, the shepherd's list, and any artifact-track page before advising.
| Anonymized at submission | Restore at camera-ready | Watch for |
|---|---|---|
| Author block, affiliations, ORCID | Full, correctly ordered | Wrong author order breaks the DOI citation |
| System / tool name | Real name throughout text, figures, artifact | A leftover placeholder in a caption or a plot legend |
| Trace / dataset provenance | Real source named, with access terms | A provenance string still pointing at an anonymizing host |
| Acknowledgements, funding | Restored | Grant numbers required by funders |
| Self-citations (third person) | Natural first-person where it aids clarity | Over-correcting and double-citing |
[Template] acmsmall single-column, current revision; no manual margin/font edits
[Metadata] title, abstract, authors+ORCID, CCS concepts, keywords all entered and matching PDF
[References] complete, consistent; DOIs where available (references are unlimited pages)
[Figures] vector where possible; readable in print; analysis-vs-simulation overlays legible
[Proofs] final proof appendix matches the shepherded theorem statements and assumptions
[Rights] ACM e-rights/copyright form completed; correct rights statement on the first page
[Links] every artifact/data link resolves from a logged-out browser
The shepherd required moving an assumption-validity check from a footnote into the model section and adding the goodness-of-fit figure. Camera-ready move: place the assumption check in the model section with the QQ-plot, restore the real trace name and its access terms, confirm the theorem statement and proof appendix still match, and point the artifact link at the now-public DOI archive — without expanding the bound the reviewers accepted.
Where an artifact track runs, badges are typically pursued around acceptance and are separate from the shepherded camera-ready. Make the paper's reproducibility statement consistent with the badges you are pursuing (Available at minimum; Functional/Reusable/Reproduced if the track grants them), and add any badge acknowledgement only per the current instructions.
[Camera-ready status] ready / needs fixes / blocked
[De-anonymization] author block / system name / trace provenance / acks / links restored? yes/no
[POMACS metadata] ORCID / CCS / keywords / rights form complete? yes/no
[Shepherd-change map] <required change -> final edit, no scope creep>
[Reproducibility] anonymized links replaced by DOI archive? proofs/simulator final? yes/no
[Remaining owner] <person -> task>