Below are the general *ACL policies for preparing the review version of your paper.
If your question is not answered here, please email the current publications chairs for any questions or clarifications. We will update this page if new issues arise.
As reviewing will be double-blind, review versions must not include any identifying information about the authors (such as names, affiliations, or URLs). Self-references that reveal the author’s identity, e.g.,
We previously showed (Gusfield, 1997)…
must be avoided, and anonymous citations, e.g.,
We previously showed (Anonymous, 1997)…
should also be avoided. Instead, use citations such as
Gusfield (1997) previously showed…
Review versions must not include acknowledgments.
Papers that do not conform to these requirements may be rejected without review.
Any preliminary non-archival versions of submitted papers should be listed in the submission form, if requested. They should not be listed in the paper itself. Reviewers are generally aware that authors may present preliminary versions of their work in other venues, but will not be provided the list of previous presentations from the submission form.
Once a paper has been accepted to the conference, the final version should include the author’s names and affiliations, and is allowed to use self-references.
Papers that have been or will be submitted to other meetings or publications must indicate this at submission time in the system submission form, and must be withdrawn from the other venues if accepted by *ACL. Authors of papers accepted for presentation at *ACL must notify the program chairs by the deadline for final versions (“camera-ready deadline”) whether the paper will be presented. We will not accept for publication or presentation any papers that overlap significantly in content or results with papers that will be (or have been) published elsewhere.
Authors submitting more than one paper to *ACL must ensure that submissions do not overlap significantly (>25%) with each other in content or results.