Use when converting a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) acceptance into its deliverables — the IEEE proceedings version with copyright and de-anonymization steps, the public arXiv/ECCC full version the CFP expects, the New York talk, and award-eligibility hygiene.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill focs-camera-ready --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Focs Camera Ready?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-focs-camera-ready)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: focs-camera-ready
description: Use when converting a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) acceptance into its deliverables — the IEEE proceedings version with copyright and de-anonymization steps, the public arXiv/ECCC full version the CFP expects, the New York talk, and award-eligibility hygiene.
---
# FOCS Camera-Ready
Acceptance at FOCS creates two publication duties with different owners of
truth: a proceedings version, produced to IEEE specifications and published
via IEEE Xplore and the IEEE Computer Society Digital Library, and a public
full version with complete proofs that the CFP expects on arXiv, ECCC, or an
equivalent open host by the camera-ready deadline (2026 CFP, checked
2026-07-08; the 2026 camera-ready date and format instructions were not
public at check time — the acceptance packet is the controlling source,
待核实). This skill sequences both.
## The two deliverables
| | Proceedings version | Public full version |
|---|---|---|
| Publisher | IEEE (Xplore + CS Digital Library) | You (arXiv / ECCC) |
| Role | Citable record of the FOCS acceptance | Record of correctness — the document experts actually read |
| Length | Per acceptance packet (待核实) | Unlimited; all proofs |
| Rights | IEEE copyright/publication form (electronic; exact form 待核实) | You retain arXiv license choice |
| Deadline | Camera-ready date (待核实) | CFP expectation: same date |
| Failure cost | Paper dropped from proceedings | Community reads a proofless announcement; reputational, and real |
Treat the full version as the primary deliverable and the proceedings file as
its formatted excerpt — that ordering produces consistent documents; the
reverse ordering produces a proofless PDF and an orphaned preprint.
## De-anonymization, done completely
Reversing double-blind is more than restoring the author block:
- Author names, affiliations, emails, ORCIDs in the packet's required format
and order (author-order changes after acceptance need chair approval).
- Acknowledgements and grant numbers restored — check funder mandates now,
since some require specific contract-number phrasing and open-access
handling of the accepted version.
- Self-citations rewritten out of the third person where it now reads
absurdly ("Chen et al. [7] — the present authors — showed…" becomes "In
earlier work [7] we showed…").
- The "full version" pointer made concrete: replace "the full version" with
the actual arXiv/ECCC identifier on the first page.
## Consistency audit before the deadline
The one camera-ready failure that follows a theory paper forever is
divergence between the proceedings version and the full version. Run the
statement-freeze check across the two sources one last time:
```bash
# same extractor as focs-reproducibility; both sources, post-edits
./extract_statements.sh proceedings-src/ fullversion-src/
# hashes must match: no theorem statement may differ between the
# document people cite and the document people check
# then verify the cross-pointers resolve:
grep -o 'arXiv:[0-9v.]*' proceedings-src/*.tex # correct ID, correct version
```
If reviewer comments prompted real changes (a repaired lemma, a weakened
claim), apply them to *both* documents and record them in the full version's
changelog ("v3, camera-ready: Lemma 6.2 hypothesis corrected following
committee comments"). Improvements beyond reviewer comments are safe when
they strengthen exposition; new results belong in the journal version, not
in a camera-ready that no longer matches what was refereed.
## The November talk and the awards file
- **Talk:** every accepted FOCS paper gets a program slot in New York
(November 8–11, 2026); whether the 2026 program runs single-track or
parallel sessions was unannounced at check time (待核实). Build the talk
from the ten-page window's narrative — problem, obstacle, one real idea —
not from the section structure; twenty minutes fits one idea.
- **Registration and attendance duties** for accepted papers (who must
register, in-person requirements): 待核实 in the acceptance packet; budget
as if required.
- **Awards:** the PC designates Best Paper and the **Machtey Award** for best
student paper from the accepted pool — recent Machtey citations (2024: the
Ising-perceptron capacity paper; papers with all-student author teams) show
the profile. If your author team's student status matters, confirm the
packet's eligibility declaration is filled accurately; misdeclared status
is unfixable after the program is printed.
## Working with IEEE production
Expect the production pipeline of an IEEE Computer Society proceedings —
specific class files, a compliance-checking step, and an electronic
copyright form — with the 2026 specifics (template, page allowance, upload
system) defined only by the acceptance packet (待核实). Two habits that
prevent the classic failures: run the packet's compliance checks on day one
rather than deadline day, because font-embedding and figure-format errors
take iterations to clear; and keep the proceedings source a *generated
projection* of your canonical source (a documented set of cut points and
`\iffull` switches), never a hand-forked copy — hand forks are how the
proceedings version acquires the typo the full version already fixed.
## Endgame sequence
1. Acceptance week: read the packet twice; diary the camera-ready date;
file the IEEE form early (copyright questions take days, not hours).
2. Week 1: apply reviewer-prompted fixes to the canonical source; regenerate
both documents from it.
3. Week 2: de-anonymization pass; funder-compliance check; consistency audit
above; co-author sign-off on the exact PDFs.
4. Submission: upload proceedings files; post/refresh the full version so
the identifier printed in the proceedings resolves *today*, not at the
conference.
5. Before travel: talk rehearsed against a mixed-TCS audience; slides carry
the arXiv/ECCC ID on the final frame.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!