Abstracts Submission

Please be aware that, similar to last year, we require all full papers to submit an abstract and metadata about the paper prior to the paper submission deadline on the conference submission system PCS (linked below). Papers that did not submit the abstract on time will not be accepted.

In addition, the abstract, title, and list of authors’ information that is submitted at that time must be complete. Submissions for which it is obvious that the information submitted by the abstract deadline is merely a placeholder or incomplete will be deleted.

Format and Submission

Full papers are 6,000-10,000 words (including figures, tables, proofs, appendixes, and any other content excluding references and acknowledgments). Submissions above 10,000 or below 6,000 words will require justification for the length in relation to the contribution. Papers whose lengths are incommensurate with their contributions may be rejected.

All papers will be reviewed by multiple external reviewers. Another programme committee member will lead the reviewing process, write a meta review, and later check on the paper for final acceptance if it got conditionally accepted (all accept decisions are conditional).

You must use the ACM LaTeX or Word templates to prepare your submission.

The correct template for initial submissions is one of:

• 1-column Word Submission Template (acm_submission_template.docx)
• 1-column LaTeX (also on Overleaf). Please note that the default template is set for 2-column and needs to be manually changed to 1-column for initial review.

We encourage the use of LaTeX and the official ACM template on Overleaf. LaTeX users must employ the following document class for submission: \documentclass[manuscript,screen,review,anonymous]{acmart}.

Word users must use the one-column submission template and should be prepared to submit to TAPS approximately one week earlier than the stated camera-ready deadline.

ACM’s CCS concepts and keywords are not required for submission and peer review but are required if your paper is accepted and published by the ACM.

ACM Open

All CUI 2027 papers will be published under ACM Open.

Starting January 1, 2026, ACM will fully transition to Open Access. All ACM publications, including those from ACM-sponsored conferences, will be 100% Open Access. Authors will have two primary options for publishing Open Access articles with ACM: the ACM Open institutional model or by paying Article Processing Charges (APCs). With over 2,600 institutions already part of ACM Open, the majority of ACM-sponsored conference papers will not require APCs from authors or conferences (currently, around 76%).

Authors from institutions not participating in ACM Open will need to pay an APC to publish their papers, unless they qualify for a financial or discretionary waiver. To find out whether an APC applies to your article, please consult the list of participating institutions in ACM Open and review the APC Waivers and Discounts Policy. Keep in mind that waivers are rare and are granted based on specific criteria set by ACM.

Understanding that this change could present financial challenges, ACM has approved a temporary subsidy for 2027 to ease the transition and allow more time for institutions to join ACM Open. The subsidy will offer:

• $250 APC for ACM/SIG members
• $350 for non-members

This represents a 65% discount, funded directly by ACM. Authors are encouraged to help advocate for their institutions to join ACM Open during this transition period. This temporary subsidized pricing will apply to all conferences scheduled for 2027, including CUI.

Upon Acceptance

Please ensure that you and your co-authors obtain an ORCID ID to complete the publishing process for your accepted paper. We recommend all authors read ACM’s guidance for TAPS Best Practice. Your paper will be published in the CUI Proceedings in the ACM Digital Library. SIGCHI participates in the ACM Open Table of Contents (OpenTOC) service, which means papers will be freely available from this website for the first year after publication. All ACM publications follow the Green Open Access route by default, though authors may opt for Gold Open Access at their discretion.

New ACM Publication Policies

By submitting your article to an ACM Publication, you are hereby acknowledging that you and your co-authors are subject to all ACM Publications Policies, including ACM’s new Publications Policy on Research Involving Human Participants and Subjects. Alleged violations of this policy or any ACM Publications Policy will be investigated by ACM and may result in a full retraction of your paper, in addition to other potential penalties, as per ACM Publications Policy.

Accessibility

Paper submissions are expected to follow the SIGCHI Guide to an Accessible Submission.

When preparing figures, make sure to rely not only on colour to mark information. Authors are expected to provide a text description for all figures. Tables, equations and quotes should be inserted as marked-up elements, not as images.

Anonymization

The CUI papers review process is based on reviewing where the identities of both the authors and reviewers are kept hidden (but 1ACs know these details). Authors are expected to remove author and institutional identities from the title and header areas of the paper, as noted in the submission instructions (n.b., changing the text color of the author information is not sufficient). Make sure that no description or information that can easily reveal authors’ identities is included in the submission (e.g., too detailed descriptions of where user studies were conducted, where authors received IRB approvals, or figures that include faces of authors). Authors should also remove any information in the acknowledgements section that reveals authors or the institution (e.g., specific supporting grant information). Also, please make sure that identifying information does not appear in the document’s metadata (e.g., the ‘Authors’ field in your word processor’s ‘Save As’ dialog box).

Authors are expected to anonymize their identities in the body of the paper, but leave citations to their previous work unanonymized so that reviewers can ensure that all previous research has been taken into account by the authors. Authors are required to cite their own work in the third person, e.g., avoid “As described in our previous work [10], … ” and use instead “As described by Doe et al. [10], …” In cases where anonymization in the context of prior work is especially tricky, please contact the Papers chairs and ask for advice. Note that the use of any references marked “anonymous” is grounds for desk rejection.

In order to ensure the fairness of the reviewing process, CUI uses a review process where external reviewers do not know the identity of authors, and authors do not know the identity of external reviewers. While publication in public archives (e.g. arXiv) is becoming standard across many fields, authors should be aware that unconscious biases can affect the nature of reviews when identities are known. CUI does not discourage non-archival publication of work prior to or during the review process, but recognizes that complete anonymization becomes more difficult in that context. While reviewers should not actively seek information about author identity, complete anonymization is difficult and can be made more so by publication and promotion of work during the CUI review process.

If a submission contains any element (e.g., text or figures in the full paper document, artifacts, or supplementary materials) that violates the anonymization guidelines, it will be desk rejected. If there are exceptional circumstances, please contact the Paper Chairs as soon as possible (papers2027@cui.acm.org).

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary materials are not required for a submission. In general, there are three main types of supplemental materials that may be submitted: videos, appendices, and artifacts (e.g., software, hardware, data sets, etc.). Supplementary material may include, for example, questionnaires used as measurements, survey text, experimental protocols, figures of experimental apparatus, tables of supplementary data, source code, and data, all of which can help reviewers assess your work as well as allow other researchers to replicate your work. Note that appendices should never be added to the main document (even if the LaTeX template allows it). Instead, appendices should be submitted as a supplementary material, and will be archived together with the paper in the ACM DL. Any non-video supplementary material should be submitted as a single .zip file, including a README file with a description of the materials.

Reviewers should be able to access the contribution of the paper solely based on the main submission file. That is, the paper submission must stand on its own without the supplementary material. If authors do choose to submit supplementary materials, such materials may not be used to get around the page limit for full paper submissions. Additional experimental analysis, additional results, and lengthy text that clarifies aspects of the full paper submission is not appropriate for an appendix. Any submissions that attempt to use appendices or supplementary materials in general in a manner that violates the page limits will be desk rejected.

All supplementary material must be anonymized. Non-anonymized supplemental materials will result in desk rejection of the entire submission.

Studies with Human Participants

As a published ACM author, you and your co-authors are subject to all ACM Publications Policies, including ACM’s new Publications Policy on Research Involving Human Participants and Subjects.

To support building a strong evidence base in CUI, and encourage future reproducibility of published work, all submissions involving studies with human participants clearly outline their methodology regardless of the theme they are submitted to, including:

• Participant demographics and sampling approach, e.g. gender, ethnicity, etc. (c.f., recommendations in Schlesinger et al., 2017, and HCI Gender Guidelines)
• If a Wizard-of-Oz paradigm was used, a detailed description of the CUI system, wizard, user, etc. (c.f., Riek 2012, Table 2)
• If a CUI system was used, a detailed description of the platform and its capabilities.
• If generative AI models are used, a reflection on their openness (c.f. Liesenfeld et al., 2023)

In addition, studies that involve human participants need to include an ethical approval statement. According to the ACM Publications Policy on Research Involving Human Participants and Subjects, “It is the authors’ responsibility (each author individually and the authors collectively) to comply with and provide evidence of compliance with this Policy. Where local ethical review boards are required, authors are responsible for having their research reviewed and approved by such boards. Authors are also responsible for the overall ethical conduct of their research. All ACM Authors must be prepared to provide documentary evidence to ACM that they have adhered to local ethical and legal standards, as ACM may require documentary evidence of such approval at any time following submission of the Work and prior to or after publication of the Work.” In the case of child users, in addition to consent from legal carers / parents, authors should describe how they obtained the oral assent from minors. Examples of such statements are “the study was approved by our Institutional Review Board” or “the study design, the experiment protocol, and the consent forms received approval from the Ethics Committee of our institution” (note that these statements must be anonymized). Additionally, during paper submission, authors will be asked to declare whether their research involves human participants, and if it does, whether approval from a relevant ethics committee was obtained.

We recognize that some researchers may work in jurisdictions where there is no mandated ethical review, or may not have access to an institutional ethics committee. In such cases, we will follow the ACM’s Policy on Research Involving Human Participants and Subjects, which lists a basic set of standards and practices that a research should follow, and states that “where such research is conducted in countries where no such local governing laws and regulations related to human participant and subject research exist, authors must at a bare minimum be prepared to show compliance with the above detailed principles.” In addition to the declaration mentioned above, the paper submission form contains also an optional question allowing authors to describe additional context related to human participant protection. If additional explanations regarding institutional review are needed, and in particular if no ethics approval was obtained for the research, the authors should answer this question with enough detail to show that their research was done in full compliance with the ethical research principles stated in the ACM Policy.

Use of Artificial Intelligence

ACM has updated its guidelines regarding the use of generative AI tools. Under the ACM Policy on Authorship, authors are responsible for the content of their submissions and the ethical use of technology. The policy outlines key expectations for using AI in research and writing:

1. When using Artificial Intelligence to conduct research, including the design and methodology of the research project, creation and selection of data sources, designing experiments, generation and collection of data, coding, implementing models, running simulations, data analysis, testing, validating results, deploying software, archiving data and code for reproducibility, or any other aspects of the research lifecycle that are directly relevant to the conclusions of the research underlying the Work, the specific use(s) of AI tools must be described in detail in the methods section of the Work. This includes the creation of artifacts that are directly relevant to the conclusions of the research, such as code, datasets, and charts or figures that rely on the AI tools.
2. When using Artificial Intelligence to assist with writing an ACM submission, ACM no longer requires the disclosure of information regarding the use of AI (as distinct from AI used in the conduct of the research itself, addressed in item 1 above).
3. All named authors on an ACM submission will be held responsible and accountable for any problematic content contained in the submission regardless of the source of that problematic content:
   • In the event content integrity issues stemming from the use of AI during authorship are identified prior to publication or posting in the ACM Digital Library, ACM reserves the right to reject submissions in their entirety and impose additional penalties.
   • In the event content integrity issues stemming from the use of AI during authorship are identified after publication or posting in the ACM Digital Library, ACM reserves the right to retract the published Work in its entirety.
   • A retraction notice will be published on the citation page of the published Work, indicating the Work has been retracted because of integrity issues identified after publication, including the inclusion of fraudulent material. ACM may or may not include any reference to the use of Artificial Intelligence in the retraction notice.

Desk Rejects

Desk rejects are made during the initial checks of submissions to save our reviewers’ time. The main reasons for a desk rejection include:

• Scope: clearly out of scope for conference (e.g., no relevance to human-computer interaction involving conversational user interfaces or speech and language technology).
• Anonymization: any violation of the rules detailed in the anonymization guidelines.
• Incomplete submissions: missing submission information (including an obviously placeholder title or abstract, etc.).
• Formatting issues:
  • paper is breaking the full paper limit (significantly over 10,000 words excluding references);
  • using an incorrect submission template.
• Other obvious issues, such as paper clearly unfinished, use of foundation models for generating the contents which does not comply with the ACM Policy on Authorship, not written in English, etc.