SUBMISSIONS

Author Guidelines

WACV 2024 Author Guidelines

Submission Site: https://cmt3.research.microsoft.com/WACV2024 

Conference Site: https://wacv2024.thecvf.com/home

Deadlines

**note that all PT timezone deadlines are AM not PM

Round 1: 

  • Paper registration: June 21st, 2023 11:59 AM PT (June 21st, 2023 06:59 PM GMT)
  • Submission: June 28th, 2023 11:59 AM PT (June 28th, 2023 06:59 PM GMT)
  • Supplementary material deadline: June 30th, 11:59 AM PT (June 30th, 2023 06:59 PM GMT)
  • Reviews and Decisions released to authors: Aug 11th, 2023
  • Rebuttal and Revision submission: Aug. 30th, 2023 11:59 AM PT (Aug. 30th, 2023 06:59 PM GMT)
  • Final Decisions released to authors: Oct 20th, 2023

Round 2: 

  • Paper registration: Aug 23rd, 2023 11:59 AM PT (Aug. 23th, 2023 06:59 PM GMT)
  • Submission: Aug 30th, 2023 11:59 AM PT (Aug. 30th, 2023 06:59 PM GMT)
  • Supplementary material deadline: September 1st, 11:59 AM PT (September 1st, 2023 06:59 PM GMT)
  • Reviews and Final Decisions released to authors: Oct 20th, 2023 

As in previous years, WACV 2024 will employ a two-round review process. New papers can be submitted in either the first or the second round. The primary benefit of submitting in Round 1 is that submissions which are not accepted early in the first round can be revised and resubmitted along with a rebuttal, enabling authors to address reviewer concerns. Round 2 submissions will not have a rebuttal.

Call for Papers

WACV provides a forum for computer vision researchers working on practical applications and innovative algorithms to share their latest developments. Papers can be submitted to either the applications or the algorithms tracks. 

Applications papers will be evaluated on systems-level innovation, novelty of the domain and comparative assessment. Recent examples of WACV application-track papers:

Algorithms papers will be evaluated according to the standard conference criteria including algorithmic novelty and quantified evaluation against current, alternative approaches. Algorithms papers will be similar in style to other major computer vision conferences (e.g., CVPR, ICCV, and ECCV). Recent examples include:

The tracks will have different review criteria. Authors will have the opportunity to select either the Applications or Algorithms tracks by following the instructions in the LaTeX template and selecting a corresponding primary subject area in the submission process. More details below.

Policies

Review Process: By submitting a paper to WACV, the authors agree to the review process and understand that papers are processed by the Toronto Paper Matching System (TPMS) to match each manuscript to the best possible area chairs and reviewers.

Confidentiality: The review process of WACV is confidential. Reviewers are volunteers; they are not part of the WACV organization and their efforts are greatly appreciated. The practice of keeping all information confidential during the review is part of the standard communication to all reviewers. Misuse of confidential information is a severe professional failure and appropriate measures will be taken when brought to the attention of the WACV organizers. It should be noted, however, that the organization of WACV is not and cannot be held responsible for the consequences when reviewers break confidentiality.

Conflict Responsibilities: It is the primary author’s responsibility to ensure that all authors on their paper have registered their institutional conflicts into the submission system – CMT3 (see details under Domain Conflicts below). If a paper is found to have an undeclared or incorrect institutional conflict, the paper may be desk  rejected. To avoid undeclared conflicts, the author list is considered to be final after the submission deadline and no changes are allowed for accepted papers.

Double blind review: WACV reviewing is double blind, in that authors do not know the names of the area chair/reviewers of their papers, and the area chairs/reviewers cannot, beyond reasonable doubt, infer the names of the authors from the submission and the additional material. Do not provide information that may identify the authors in the acknowledgments (e.g., co-workers and grant IDs) and in the supplemental material (e.g., titles in the movies, or attached papers). Also do not provide links to websites that identify the authors. Violation of any of these guidelines may lead to desk rejection. 

Plagiarism: Plagiarism consists of appropriating the words or results of another, without credit. WACV 2024’s policy on plagiarism is to refer suspected cases to the IEEE Intellectual Property office, which has an established mechanism for dealing with plagiarism and wide powers of excluding offending authors from future conferences and from IEEE journals. You can find information on this office, their procedures, and their definitions of five levels of plagiarism at this webpage. We will be actively checking for plagiarism. Furthermore, the paper matching system is quite accurate. As a result, it regularly happens that a paper containing plagiarized material goes to a reviewer from whom material was plagiarized; experience shows that such reviewers pursue plagiarism cases enthusiastically.

Use of Large Language Models (LLMs): Our LLM policy follows the NeurIPS 2023 guidelines, slightly modified for WACV. “We welcome authors to use any tool that is suitable for preparing high-quality papers and research. However, we ask authors to keep in mind two important criteria. First, we expect papers to fully describe their methodology, and any tool that is important to that methodology, including the use of LLMs, should be described also. For example, authors should mention tools (including LLMs) that were used for data processing or filtering, visualization, facilitating or running experiments, and proving theorems. It may also be advisable to describe the use of LLMs in implementing the method (if this corresponds to an important, original, or non-standard component of the approach). Second, authors are responsible for the entire content of the paper, including all text and figures.” Authors must ensure that all text is correct and original. All text will be subjected to the plagiarism checker.

Dual/Double Submissions: The goals of WACV are to publish exciting new work for the first time and to avoid duplicating the effort of reviewers. By submitting a manuscript to WACV, the authors acknowledge that it has not been previously published or accepted for publication in substantially similar form in any peer-reviewed venue including journal, conference or workshop, or archival forum. Furthermore, no publication substantially similar in content has been or will be submitted to this or another conference, workshop, or journal during the review period. Violation of any of these conditions will lead to rejection, and will be reported to the other venue to which the submission was sent.

A publication, for the purposes of this policy, is defined to be a written work longer than four pages (excluding references) that was submitted for review by peers to a workshop, conference, or journal for either acceptance or rejection, and, after review, was accepted. In particular, this definition of publication does not depend upon whether such an accepted written work appears in a formal proceedings or whether the organizers declare that such work “counts as a publication.” For this policy, a “publication” does not include arXiv.org pre-prints or university technical reports, which are typically not peer reviewed.

A submission with substantial overlap is one that shares 20 percent or more material with previous or concurrently submitted publications. Authors are encouraged to contact the Program Chairs about clarifications on borderline cases.

Discussion of potential negative societal impact: As the AI community at large has been paying increasing attention to the issue of negative societal impact of research, WACV 2024 aims to raise awareness of potential negative societal impact in the WACV community as well. We encourage all authors to think about this issue in the context of the technologies they developed and discuss that in their paper. Note that there is no formal requirement to include a discussion of potential negative societal impact, but reviewers will be asked to favorably consider the inclusion of a meaningful discussion of this issue.

Examples of negative societal impact include potential malicious or unintended uses (e.g., disinformation, generating fake profiles, surveillance), environmental impact (e.g., training huge models), fairness considerations (e.g., deployment of technologies that could further disadvantage historically disadvantaged groups), privacy considerations (e.g., a paper on model/data stealing), and security considerations (e.g., adversarial attacks).

As computer vision applications mature, we see many examples of potential misuse; applications often have multiple uses. A thorough discussion of potential societal impact is beneficial as it raises awareness in the community. Reviewers and area chairs will be asked to favorably consider the inclusion of a meaningful discussion of potential negative societal impact. While in rare cases, papers with glaring negative consequences might be seen critically by the reviewers, this is independent of whether this negative impact is discussed in the paper or not. 

Attendance responsibilities: The authors agree that if the paper is accepted, at least one of the authors must register for the conference at the full, in-person rate no matter the format presented.

Publication: All accepted papers will be made publicly available by the Computer Vision Foundation (CVF) two weeks before the conference. Authors wishing to submit a patent understand that the paper’s official public disclosure is two weeks before the conference or whenever the authors make it publicly available, whichever is first. The conference considers papers confidential until published two weeks before the conference, but notes that multiple organizations will have access during the review and production processes, so those seeking patents should discuss filing dates with their IP counsel. The conference assumes no liability for early disclosures. More information about CVF is available at http://www.cv-foundation.org/.

Authors acting as reviewers: We expect all authors to be willing to serve as reviewers as well. With a large enough pool of reviewers, we expect that reviewers will be sent 2-4 papers to review. 

Submission Guidelines

All submissions will be handled electronically via CMT (https://cmt3.research.microsoft.com/WACV2024). By submitting a paper, the authors agree to the policies stipulated in this website. WACV follows a two-round submission process. Please check the conference web pages for the most up-to-date deadlines. Papers are limited to eight pages, including figures and tables, in the WACV style. Additional pages containing only cited references are allowed. Please refer to the WACV author kit. Papers that are not properly anonymized, or do not use the template, or have more than eight pages (excluding references) will be rejected without review.

Paper submission and review site: Submission Site

  • Please make sure that your browser has cookies and Javascript enabled.
  • Please add “email@msr-cmt.org” to your list of safe senders (whitelist) to prevent important email announcements from being blocked by spam filters.
  • Log into CMT3 at https://cmt3.research.microsoft.com. If you do not see “Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision 2024” in the conference list already, click on the “All Conferences” tab and find it there.

Author registration: 

  • When you log in for the first time, you will be asked to set up a user profile and provide their conflict information. Later, you can update this information by clicking on your name in the upper-right and selecting “User information” under WACV2024.
  • It is the primary author’s responsibility to ensure that all authors on their paper have registered on CMT3 and provide their conflict information.
  • Conflict Information: Authors need to provide information on conflict domains. Each author should list domains of all institutions they have worked for, or have had very close collaboration with, within the last 3 years (example: mit.edu; ox.ac.uk; microsoft.com). DO NOT enter the domain of email providers such as gmail.com. This institutional conflict information will be used to resolve assignments to both reviewers and area chairs. If a paper is found to have an undeclared or incorrect institutional conflict, the paper may be summarily rejected.

Creating a Paper Submission: 

  • This step must be completed by the paper registration deadline. After this deadline, you will not be able to register new papers, but you will be able to edit the information for existing papers. Note: we are allowing changes to the author list until the full paper deadline. After that, no changes will be permitted for any reason, including for the camera-ready version.
  • Click the “+ Create new submission” button in the upper-left to create a new submission. There, you will be prompted to enter the title, abstract, authors, and subject areas.
  • Check with your co-authors to make sure that: (1) you add them with their correct CMT3 email; and (2) they have logged in to the submission website and filled out the conflict information on CMT3. If you add an author with an email that is not in CMT3 and the name and organization is not automatically filled, that means they are not yet in the system, and you should make sure to check that they do not already have an account under a different email before completing the requested information to add them.
  • Enter subject (topic) areas for your paper. You must include at least one primary area and up to 2 secondary areas. Your primary selection will determine whether your paper is submitted to the Applications or Algorithms tracks.
  • Paper Number: Once you have registered your paper (i.e. title/authors), you will be assigned a paper number. Insert this into the template before generating the PDF of your paper for submission. Papers submitted without a number may not be reviewed.

Other Submission Details:

  • Authorship Changes: After the paper submission deadline, the list of authors will be considered final. After that date, new authors CANNOT be added; authors may also NOT be removed. Changes to the authorship order will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances.
  • Submission Requirements:
    • The maximum size of the abstract is 2000 characters.
    • The paper must be PDF only (maximum 20MB). Make sure your paper meets the formatting and anonymity requirements described above.
    • The supplementary material can be either PDF or ZIP only (maximum 100MB).

Supplementary Material 

  • By the supplementary material deadline, the authors may optionally submit code and/or additional material that was ready at the time of paper submission but could not be included due to constraints of format or space. The authors should refer to the contents of the supplementary material appropriately in the paper. 
  • Reviewers will be encouraged to look at supplementary material, but are not obligated to do so.
  • Supplementary material may include videos, proofs, additional figures or tables, more detailed analysis of experiments presented in the paper, or code. 
  • Supplementary material may not include results on additional datasets, results obtained with an improved version of the method (e.g., following additional parameter tuning or training), or an updated or corrected version of the submission PDF. 
  • Make sure the supplementary material does not reveal author identity. 
  • Papers with supplementary materials violating the guidelines may be summarily rejected.

Code Submission and Reproducibility: 

  • To improve reproducibility in AI research, we highly encourage authors to voluntarily submit their code as part of the supplementary material. Authors should also use the Reproducibility Checklist as a guide for writing reproducible papers. 
  • Reviewers are encouraged to check the submitted code to ensure that the paper’s results are trustworthy and reproducible. 
  • The code should be anonymized, e.g., author names and institutions (e.g. also in license / copyright statements) should be removed. 
  • The authors should include instructions for how to set up the environment and run the code. 
  • The code does not need to cover all experiments, but should aim to cover the main results and as many of the minor experiments as possible. 
  • All code/data will be reviewed confidentially and kept private.

Review Process

Like previous years, WACV 2024 will follow a two-round review process that is similar to journal submissions to provide the authors with an additional chance to defend and/or revise their submissions.

For Round 1, submissions will be reviewed by at least three reviewers. A group of area chairs will consolidate the reviews and make one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept: The submission has been accepted to WACV 2024.
  • Revise: The submission has not been accepted to WACV 2024, but can be revised and resubmitted to Round 2. The authors may choose to withdraw the paper as well.

Accepted papers will be asked to submit the final version by the Round 1 camera ready deadline. 

For papers with a “Revise” recommendation in Round 1, the submission will maintain the same ID and be submitted as a revision to Round 2. Please DO NOT create a new paper submission for revised papers. Revised submissions include: 

  • A revised version of the original paper (required).
  • A 1-page rebuttal  (using the provided template) addressing the reviewers’ concerns and highlighting what changes were made since the original submission (required).
  • Revised supplementary material (optional). 

The revised version will be sent for another round of review to the same reviewers and ACs. 

Completely new Round 2 submissions will follow a similar review process as Round 1, with the crucial difference that Round 2 papers will not have a rebuttal and revision step. In other words, the ACs will provide their final decisions based on the reviews directly without any additional author feedback.

At the end of the Round 2 review process the ACs will consolidate the reviews and make one of the following recommendations for both the Round 1 revisions and new Round 2 submissions:

  • Accept: The submission has been accepted to WACV 2024.
  • Reject: The submission has been rejected from WACV 2024.

Accepted papers will be asked to submit the final version by the Round 2 camera ready deadline. 

For additional questions, contact the WACV24 Program Chairs at wacv2024-pcs@googlegroups.com.