--- name: recsys-workflow description: Use when planning an ACM RecSys project timeline from venue fit through abstract, full paper, the anonymous repository, rebuttal, decision, ACM camera-ready, registration, and presentation, with backward-planning offsets for an offline-evaluation recommender paper and per-track date awareness (Main, Reproducibility, Industry, Resource, R&P Notes). --- # RecSys Workflow Use this as the project-management skill for a RecSys submission. Replace all dates with the current official timetable and work backwards from the submission-system cutoffs. RecSys is a conference, not a journal: it has no standing editor-in-chief and no article-processing charge. The rotating leadership is the per-edition General Chairs and Program Chairs (2026 General Chairs: Joseph A. Konstan, George Karypis, Gediminas Adomavicius; Program Chairs: Minmin Chen, Bart Goethals, Martijn Willemsen — verified 2026-07-09), and the cost model is registration fees, with proceedings in the ACM Digital Library. Chairs rotate yearly, so re-check the current committees page rather than carrying a name forward. ## Per-track dates are not the same The 2026 cycle ran several tracks on **different** timetables — do not assume the Main Track dates apply to your track. | Track (2026, AoE) | Abstract | Paper | Notification | Camera-ready | |---|---|---|---|---| | Main (long/short/PPF) | Apr 14 | Apr 21 | Jul 9 | 待核实 | | Reproducibility | Apr 28 | May 5 | Jul 9 | Jul 27 | | Industry | (site Mar 2) | May 21 | Jul 9 | Jul 27 | | Resource / Dataset | Apr 28 | May 5 | Jul 9 | 待核实 | | R&P Notes / Demos | — | Jul 15 | — | — | The Main-Track rebuttal window was June 4-9, 2026. Anchor every one of these to the current CFP; they are historical anchors, not permanent rules. ## Milestones - Venue fit: confirm the contribution is genuinely a recommendation result (see `recsys-topic-selection`). - Evidence lock: freeze datasets, the split protocol, tuned baselines, seeds, ablations, and the anonymous repository contents. - Abstract deadline: submit real title, abstract, authors, and topic areas. - Paper deadline: upload the anonymous PDF, the in-paper anonymous repository link, and required fields. - Rebuttal: draft a concise anonymous narrative on the central evaluation objection. - Decision: archive reviews, rebuttal, and the submitted version. - Acceptance: prepare the ACM camera-ready, rights form, registration, presentation, and the public artifact release. ## Backward plan from the paper deadline | Weeks out (heuristic) | Offline-evaluation recommender milestone | |---|---| | 8+ | Datasets, versions, and split protocol frozen | | 6 | Baselines tuned under an equal budget; grids logged | | 4 | Ablations and the off-policy/simulator bridge complete, seeds logged | | 3 | Full draft in the ACM two-column template | | 2 | Internal mock review by a reproducibility-minded reader | | 1 | Anonymity sweep; anonymous repository builds on a clean machine | | 0 | Abstract then full paper on the submission system | These offsets are planning heuristics only — anchor them to the current official timetable. ## Failure modes by stage - Baselines still on default configs at week 3 forces an unfair-comparison reject in the making. - Leaving template conversion to the final week surfaces two-column overflow late. - Skipping the mock review forfeits the only chance to hear "this split leaks the future" from a friend instead of a reviewer. - Building the anonymous repository under deadline pressure is how commit-author leaks ship. ## Coordination notes - Assign one owner for the tuning-and-seeds protocol and another for the anonymity sweep. - Archive the exact submitted PDF and repository state, since the rebuttal must quote them. ## Output format ```text [Current stage] idea / experiments / writing / abstract / submission / rebuttal / accepted [Track + next deadline] - [Critical path] [Risk register] [Owner map] person or role> ```