Use this after acceptance in a SoCC round. The camera-ready turns the anonymized acmart
submission into the final ACM Digital Library version of your ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing
paper. Reopen the current SoCC author instructions, the acceptance email, and the ACM rights page
before advising — SoCC is jointly SIGMOD+SIGOPS, and its camera-ready is an ACM production step,
not just a formatting pass.
sigconf, within the 12-page (full)
or 6-page (short) budget, with any camera-ready page allowance the acceptance letter grants;
references remain unlimited.| Anonymized at submission | Restore at camera-ready | Watch for |
|---|---|---|
| Author block, affiliations, ORCID | Full, correctly ordered | Wrong author order breaks the DOI citation |
| System / cluster / trace name | Real name throughout text, figures, artifact | A leftover anonymized placeholder in a caption |
| Cloud provider / deployment identity | Restored where disclosable | Confidentiality limits on naming a provider |
| Acknowledgements, funding | Restored | Grant numbers required by funders |
| Self-citations (third person) | Natural first-person where it aids clarity | Over-correcting and double-citing |
| Artifact / trace link | Public archive DOI | The old anonymized URL surviving in a footnote |
[Template] acmart sigconf, current revision; no manual margin/font edits; correct page budget
[Metadata] title, abstract, authors+ORCID, CCS concepts, keywords entered and matching the PDF
[References] complete, consistent, DOIs where available; unlimited allowance, but keep it clean
[Figures] vector where possible; tail/cost plots readable in print; captions self-contained
[Rights] ACM e-rights/copyright form completed; correct rights block on the first page
[Links] every released-code and trace link resolves from a logged-out browser
The reviewers accepted the paper on the condition that the p99.9 breakdown and the pricing model behind the cost claim appear in the final version. Camera-ready move: add the p99.9 figure from the existing logs beside the p99 result, add one paragraph stating the pricing model and the resulting saving, restore the real system and testbed names in those figures, and point the availability statement at the now-public trace-replay archive — without expanding the cost claim beyond the regimes measured.
If the edition runs artifact evaluation, the camera-ready and the artifact process may be separate
deadlines. Do not wait for the artifact result to finalize the paper, but make the paper's
availability statement consistent with the ACM badges you are pursuing (Available at minimum;
Functional / Reusable / Reproduced if the track grants them). Add any badge acknowledgement only per
the current instructions. Whether SoCC offers evaluation for a given edition is 待核实 — confirm
on the current call (socc-artifact-evaluation).
[Camera-ready status] ready / needs fixes / blocked
[De-anonymization] author block / system+trace names / acks / links restored? yes/no
[ACM metadata] ORCID / CCS / keywords / rights form complete? yes/no
[Reviewer-change map] <required change -> final edit, no scope creep>
[Reproducibility] anonymized links replaced by DOI archive? trace released or exception documented?
[Remaining owner] <person -> task>