To write a computer science conference paper that meets submission requirements, first identify the exact conference, year, track, submission category, and review stage, then follow that venue’s current instructions—not a generic template or another conference’s rules. Build a clear argument supported by evidence, apply the required format and anonymity rules, and validate every file and submission-system field before the deadline.
Start with the exact submission rules
There is no universal computer science conference-paper checklist that overrides a venue’s instructions. Requirements can differ by conference, year, track, category, and submission stage. Before choosing a template or deciding how long the paper should be, find the current call for papers, author instructions, and submission-system instructions for your specific submission.
Record the following in a checklist:
- Conference and year, track, submission category, and whether this is an initial or camera-ready submission.
- Review model and anonymity requirements.
- Deadline, including the time zone, and the submission-system address.
- Required template and version, page size, column layout, and page-count method.
- Accepted file types, source-file requirements, and rules for appendices and supplementary material.
- Ethics, artifact, ORCID, conflict-of-interest, and other disclosure requirements.
When a general publisher template appears to conflict with a track-specific call, ask the venue’s publication or program chairs which instruction applies. The variation is substantial: GECCO 2026 specifies ACM SIGCONF formatting and US Letter paper (GECCO 2026 submission instructions); ACM CCS 2026 also specifies ACM SIGCONF two-column format (ACM CCS 2026 call for papers); ISCA 2026 uses its own IEEE-derived guidelines (ISCA 2026 submission guidelines). Even within ACM SIGGRAPH, initial-submission formatting varies by event: most sponsored events use a single-column manuscript, while Technical Papers are an exception (SIGGRAPH submission instructions).
Make the paper’s argument easy to assess
Before drafting, write a short argument map that connects the problem to the evidence. A reviewer should be able to identify what the work addresses, why it matters, what is missing in prior work or current practice, and what the paper contributes.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →- State the problem and why it matters to the conference’s audience.
- Identify the gap in prior work or practice that the paper addresses.
- Describe the contribution in terms that can be checked.
- Explain the method, system, proof, dataset, or analysis that supports it.
- Match each major claim to evidence and identify meaningful limitations.
Organize the paper so readers can follow this chain. An introduction, related work, approach or design, evaluation or analysis, limitations, and conclusion are common choices, not a mandatory section order for every venue. For broader craft guidance, Justin Zobel’s Writing for Computer Science, third edition, covers paper writing, style, figures, algorithms, editing, experiments, and ethics; it is not a source of current conference submission rules (Springer book page).
#1 Best Overall
Write claims reviewers can verify
Use precise terms, define specialized notation, and keep each claim proportional to its evidence. Describe experimental setups and comparison baselines clearly enough for a reviewer to assess the results. Separate measured observations from your interpretation of them.
- Make figures and tables legible, label axes and units, and cite data sources.
- Refer to each figure and table in the main text so its relevance is clear.
- Check that colors remain distinguishable in grayscale when required; ISCA 2026 explicitly calls for legible figures and tables, in-text references, and grayscale-distinguishable figure colors (ISCA 2026 submission guidelines).
- Include figure descriptions in the final source when required; UbiComp/ISWC 2026 requests them (UbiComp/ISWC 2026 submission instructions).
Use the right template and page limit
Start from the exact template and version named in the call. Verify whether the paper is single- or double-column, whether references count toward the limit, how appendices are treated, and whether reviewers are expected to read supplementary files. Do not reduce margins, shrink fonts, or alter spacing unless the venue explicitly allows it. ACM CCS 2026 says to leave its ACM template unaltered and notes that reviewers need not read appendices or supplementary material (ACM CCS 2026 call for papers).
These 2026 examples show why a page count cannot be generalized across computer science conferences:
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
| Venue and submission type | Limit stated in the 2026 instructions | Qualification |
|---|---|---|
| GECCO full paper | Up to 8 pages, excluding references | Poster-only submissions have a different rule (GECCO 2026 instructions). |
| ACM CCS paper | 12 pages of main content | The listed bibliography, well-marked appendices, and supplementary material are excluded; reviewers are not guaranteed to read appendices or supplementary material (ACM CCS 2026 call). |
| ISCA paper | 11 pages, excluding references | The guidelines describe printable, single-spaced, two-column text (ISCA 2026 guidelines). |
Abstract limits also vary. GECCO 2026 sets a maximum of 200 words for full and poster-only submissions; do not assume that limit applies elsewhere (GECCO 2026 submission instructions).
Follow the venue’s anonymity policy
If the review is double-blind or otherwise anonymous, check the whole submission rather than only the author block. Inspect the title page, acknowledgments, funding notes, document properties, PDF metadata, artifact links, repository history, and passages that could identify the authors.
Apply the venue’s rules to self-citations instead of deleting necessary references by default. ISCA 2026 tells authors to retain references and describe their prior work in the third person (ISCA 2026 guidelines). ACM CCS 2026 says submissions must be properly anonymized and instructs authors to avoid identity-revealing material and refer to prior work in the third person (ACM CCS 2026 call). ACM’s template warns that identifying information in a double-blind submission may lead to rejection without review (ACM proceedings template instructions).
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Check ethics, artifacts, and additional disclosures
Some submissions require material beyond the paper and PDF. Check the rules for human participants or participant data, artifacts, track-specific appendices, ORCIDs, and supplementary files.
- Human-participant research: ITiCSE 2026 asks authors to state whether approval was granted, by what authority, and what the approval covers, while preserving review anonymity (ITiCSE 2026 call for papers).
- Artifacts and open science: ACM CCS 2026 requires an Open Science appendix locating artifacts or explaining their absence (ACM CCS 2026 call).
- Ethical concerns: ACM CCS 2026 requires a separate ethics appendix for work with potential ethical concerns (ACM CCS 2026 call).
- Supplementary material: Confirm permitted formats, upload locations, anonymity expectations, and whether reviewers are expected to consult it.
These are venue-specific examples, not requirements for every computer science conference.
Best Value
Run a final technical and submission check
Before uploading, compile a clean copy of the final source and check the rendered files. If the venue requires source files, confirm that they produce the submitted PDF.
- Open the PDF and confirm that pages are complete and in order.
- Check the page count, paper size, layout, figure and table legibility, and required font embedding. GECCO 2026 requires embedded Type 1 or TrueType fonts and does not accept Type 3 fonts (GECCO 2026 instructions).
- Validate the bibliography: every citation should have a corresponding entry, and the formatting should compile correctly. UbiComp/ISWC 2026 says the LaTeX source should compile without errors and the bibliography should compile accurately for final publication (UbiComp/ISWC 2026 instructions).
- Recheck PDF metadata and other identifying details if the review is anonymous.
- Confirm the submission-system title and abstract match the paper, and that track, keywords, author details, conflicts, ORCIDs, and supplemental files are entered in the required places.
Some venues require substantial registration information before the paper upload. ITiCSE 2026 advises allowing at least half an hour for a first submission; that estimate applies to its process, not to every submission system (ITiCSE 2026 call for papers).
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Recommended Free Tools
