--- name: ieeesp-supplementary description: Use when deciding what goes in an IEEE S&P (Oakland) paper's appendix versus the 13-page body, including the 5-page references-and-appendices allowance, the rule that reviewers need not read appendices, marking requirements past page 13, and what must never be relegated out of the reviewed body. --- # IEEE S&P Supplementary Material Use this when splitting content between the body and the appendix. S&P's model is stricter than most: there is **no separate supplement upload** in the verified CFPs — everything is one PDF of at most 13 body pages plus at most 5 pages of references and appendices, 18 total, with all content past page 13 clearly marked as appendix and **reviewers explicitly not required to read appendices** (sp2027.ieee-security.org/cfpapers.html, checked 2026-07-08). ## The rule that decides every split If the acceptance case needs it, it lives on pages 1–13. The appendix is for material a *convinced* reviewer might verify, never for material that does the convincing. | Content | Placement | Why | |---|---|---| | Threat model, all of it | Body | The claim is undefined without it | | Adaptive-attack evaluation summary | Body | The defense's acceptance case | | End-to-end exploit walkthrough (one target) | Body | Existence proof of the attack | | Per-target breakdown across 30 targets | Appendix | Verification depth, not persuasion | | Full protocol/proof details | Appendix, with theorem statements in body | Statements are claims; derivations are checks | | Ethics considerations | Body (submission); dedicated section added at camera-ready doesn't count against limits | Reviewed substance | | Extended related work | Appendix | Positioning core stays in body (`ieeesp-related-work`) | | Measurement instrument details (query lists, scan configs) | Appendix | Reproducibility depth | ## The 5-page arithmetic References and appendices *share* the 5-page allowance. A security paper's bibliography routinely runs 2.5–3 pages in compsoc format, leaving perhaps two pages of real appendix. Consequences: - Budget references first; the appendix gets the remainder. - Long tables (per-CVE results, device lists) may need an artifact-repository home instead — but then nothing argumentative may depend on them. - "Deferred to the extended version" is acceptable for proofs *only if* the paper states the theorem and its assumptions fully in the body; check the current CFP's stance on citing anonymous tech reports (待核实). ## Marking and mechanics - Everything after page 13 must be **clearly labeled as appendix** — a running "Appendix" heading structure, not a continuation of numbered sections that silently crosses the boundary. - Appendix references from the body should be load-bearing pointers ("full derivation in App. B"), and the body sentence must still stand if the pointer is never followed. - The appendix is inside the anonymous PDF: the same anonymization sweep applies (`ieeesp-submission`), including figure paths and dataset names that identify a lab. ```text Split audit — run over the section list: for each body section: would a first-round reviewer cut the paper without this? if no → appendix candidate for each appendix item: does any *claim* in the body rely on it as evidence? if yes → PROMOTE to body or weaken the claim page check: body ≤ 13 · refs+appendix ≤ 5 · total ≤ 18 · post-13 content labeled ``` ## Interplay with the Revise pathway A Revise expectations summary often asks for material authors originally appendixed ("bring the adaptive evaluation into the main text"). Cheapest prevention: at first submission, put the *summary statistics* of every appendix experiment in the body with a pointer down — reviewers who can see the number rarely demand the relocation. ## Anti-patterns from this venue's review piles - The 13th page ends mid-evaluation and the "results continue" in Appendix A — reads as a page-limit dodge and draws the over-length flag. - Proof-by-appendix: a body theorem whose stated assumptions differ from the appendix proof's actual assumptions. - An appendix ethics discussion — at S&P ethics is reviewed substance and the registration form asks for it directly. - Appendix-only artifacts descriptions when the availability statement in the body promises more than the appendix delivers. ## Output format ```text [Page arithmetic] body /13 · refs + appendix ≤ 5 · total /18 [Marking] post-p13 labeled ✓/✗ [Promotion list] [Demotion list] [Anonymity] appendix swept ✓/✗ ```