Run this audit before uploading to the PerCom HotCRP site (percom2027.hotcrp.com for the current
cycle). PerCom research papers publish in IEEE Xplore and are reviewed double-blind, so the
submission must be both anonymous and complete on its own — the bounded rebuttal cannot add new
experiments later. Every number below was read from the PerCom 2027 Call for Papers and Dates pages
on 2026-07-09 via search renderings of the percom.org URLs (see
resources/official-source-map.md); treat them as a one-cycle snapshot and reopen the live call
first.
PerCom separates paper registration from paper submission, and both are AoE:
Register with the real title and abstract, not a placeholder — the abstract drives TPC bidding, and a registered abstract that diverges from the final paper quietly worsens your reviewer match.
\documentclass[10pt, conference, compsocconf]{IEEEtran}, US-letter, two-column —
the IEEE Computer Society conference format. This is the IEEE path, not ACM acmart.PerCom runs double-blind review: authors anonymize in good faith and cite their own prior work in the third person (do not omit it — omission is itself a tell). Because ubicomp papers lean on datasets, testbeds, and deployments, the leak surface is wide:
# Mechanical pass on the submission PDF and any anonymized dataset/artifact archive
pdfinfo paper.pdf | grep -Ei 'author|creator|producer'
pdftotext paper.pdf - | grep -nEi 'github\.com/[a-z0-9-]+|ieee-dataport|zenodo\.org/record|acknowledg|IRB|university' | head
unzip -l artifact.zip | grep -Ei '\.git/|\.DS_Store|/home/|/Users/' | head
grep -rni 'our (lab|testbed|deployment)|@[a-z0-9.]*\.edu' artifact/ --include='*.md' | head
The ubicomp-specific leaks: a testbed or smart-home named after your lab, a photo of the sensor rig showing a building or a face, a dataset link pointing at a personal repository, an IRB protocol number tied to your institution, and a "we deployed in our department" phrasing. Re-host datasets behind an anonymizing link before upload.
PerCom's community expects a credible data story and, for human-subjects sensing, an ethics story:
| Finding at audit time | Severity | Real fix |
|---|---|---|
| Over 9 pages of technical content | Desk-reject-grade | Cut or move to the dataset/artifact; the reference page does not absorb body text |
Template altered (10pt/compsocconf changed, margins, shrunk font) |
Named desk-reject ground | Recompile clean, recover space editorially |
| Identity leak in PDF, dataset link, testbed name, or a photo | Anonymity violation | Re-anonymize and re-host; scrub PDF metadata |
| Own prior work omitted for "anonymity" | Double-blind done wrong | Restore the citation in the third person |
| Abstract/authors not registered by the earlier date | No submission slot exists | Nothing fixes this post-AoE — calendar it now |
| No open-data plan, no ethics note for human data | Scored against the paper | Add the plan + IRB/consent statement |
| Same study under review elsewhere | Dual-submission exposure | Withdraw one venue; verify the current concurrent-submission wording |
compsocconf).[PerCom submission status] ready / blocked / needs work
[Registration] title/abstract/authors/topics locked by the earlier deadline? yes/no
[Format] pages used (body/refs), IEEEtran compsocconf compliance
[Anonymity] clean / leaks: <where>
[Open data + ethics] dataset link present? open-data plan? IRB/consent stated?
[Fix queue] <ordered, with owners and dates before the AoE cutoff>