Atc workflow

ATC Workflow

Plan the campaign backward from the deadline. ATC 2026 — the first ACM SIGOPS edition of the former USENIX ATC — runs on a calendar and a review structure that both changed in the transition: an early-June 2026 submission deadline (AoE; 1 vs. 10 June unresolved across renderings — 待核实), a two-round, extended-abstract review, conditional acceptance with shepherding, a separate artifact-evaluation track, and the conference in Hong Kong, 15-18 November 2026. Reopen the SIGOPS call for the exact dates before committing to any of the offsets below.

The arc (backward from the deadline)

[T-0    Submission]      paired upload: 2-page extended abstract + full paper on atc26.hotcrp.com
[Round one]             two reviewers judge each extended abstract; below-bar papers cut early
[Round two]             3-4 reviewers read the full paper of survivors
[Rebuttal]              ~1 page: correct factual misreadings; note prior-submission changes if any
[Decision]              conditional accept / reject
[Shepherding]           a PC shepherd signs off required revisions before final acceptance
[Artifact evaluation]   separate post-acceptance AEC track -> Available / Functional / Reproduced
[Camera-ready]          de-anonymize, satisfy shepherd, ACM Open Access metadata + production checks
[Nov 15-18]             present at the Hong Kong conference; talk video/slides per the venue norm

Backward plan from the June deadline

• T-10 to T-8 weeks: lock the system and freeze the experiments. On a systems paper the testbed and measurements are the long pole; leave prose churn for later. Pin environments now (atc-reproducibility) — provenance cannot be reconstructed at the deadline.
• T-6 weeks: full-paper draft complete against atc-writing-style; baselines and honest costs in place per atc-experiments.
• T-3 weeks: write and stress-test the two-page extended abstract — the round-one decision surface. Have someone read only the abstract and tell you the problem, contribution, testbed, and result. If they cannot, fix it.
• T-2 weeks: build the anonymized, runnable artifact and the claim-to-experiment map.
• T-1 week: double-blind sweep on the final PDF, abstract, and artifact; fill HotCRP fields and conflicts; confirm the exact AoE deadline day.
• T-0: upload both the extended abstract and the paper; re-download and read cold.

Between submission and decision

• Round one is silent from your side — there is no action between upload and the round-one cut; the abstract is your entire round-one argument. Do not start major new experiments hoping to swap in a stronger paper mid-cycle.
• If you advance to round two, prepare for the rebuttal: keep a running list of the measurements and clarifications a skeptical reviewer would ask for, so the ~1-page window is spent well (atc-author-response).

After a conditional accept

• Treat the shepherd's required revisions as binding. Make each change or explicitly justify declining it; the shepherd holds final acceptance until satisfied.
• Start the artifact-evaluation package immediately: the AEC track has its own post-acceptance deadline, independent of the camera-ready (atc-artifact-evaluation). De-anonymize and archive the artifact in a DOI-issuing repository for the Available badge.
• Prepare the camera-ready: de-anonymize the paper, fold in the shepherd's changes, and complete ACM Open Access metadata (atc-camera-ready). Budget for the transition APC (subsidized for 2026; exact figure per the ACM/SIGOPS terms).

Calendar reconnaissance

[Deadline]     confirm the exact early-June AoE day on the SIGOPS call (1 vs 10 June — 待核实)
[Conference]   Hong Kong (Hyatt, Shatin), Nov 15-18, 2026 — plan travel/visa early for HK
[Rotation]     under SIGOPS, ATC rotates Asia/Europe/North America; next-year location differs
[Artifact]     find the AEC submission date on the call for artifacts (separate from camera-ready)
[Backup]       if rejected, line up OSDI/NSDI/EuroSys/FAST dates via atc-topic-selection

Reverify each cycle

• The exact deadline day, notification/rebuttal dates, and camera-ready date.
• Whether the two-round extended-abstract model and the reviewer counts persist.
• Artifact-evaluation timing and the badge set; the Deployed Systems lane (待核实).
• ACM Open Access / APC terms; template file (USENIX vs. ACM) (待核实).

Output format

[ATC workflow stage] planning / drafting / abstract-hardening / submitted / round two / rebuttal / shepherding / artifact / camera-ready
[Critical path] the long-pole task (usually testbed + measurements, then the extended abstract)
[Deadline set] submission (early June AoE), rebuttal, shepherd sign-off, artifact, camera-ready
[Next action] the single most schedule-critical step, with a date
[Risk] the item most likely to slip (provenance pinning / abstract self-containment / shepherd changes)