Workshop Anonymization Guidelines
Workshops that require anonymity undergo double-blind reviewing -- the
authors do not know the identity of the program committee members and
referees who review the paper, nor do the program committee members and
referees know the identity of the authors. As an author, you are required
to make a good faith effort to preserve the anonymity of your submission
while at the same time allowing the reader to fully grasp the context of
related past work, including your own. Common sense and careful writing
will go a long way towards preserving anonymity. You should also take the
following steps when preparing your submission:
- Remove authors' names and affiliations from the title page.
- Remove acknowledgement of identifying names and funding sources.
- Use care in naming your files. Source file names, e.g.,
Joe.Smith.dvi, are often embedded in the final output as readily accessible
comments.
- Use care in referring to related work, particularly your own. Do not omit
references to provide anonymity, as this leaves the reviewer unable to grasp
the context. Instead, a good solution is to reference your past work in the third
person, just as you would any other piece of related work. For example, if
your name is Joe Smith:
In previous work [1,2], Smith presented protocols for .... In this paper, we build on that work by
...
Bibliography
[1] Joe Smith, "A Simple Protocol for ...," Proceedings of
ACM SIGCOMM 2000.
[2] Joe Smith, "A More Complicated Protocol for...," Proceedings
of ACM SIGCOMM 2001.
The requirement for anonymity is not meant to extend beyond the submission process to the
detriment of your research. In particular, you may circulate your submission
among colleagues or discuss it on a mailing list if you see fit.
|