Use when auditing an INTERSPEECH submission before the CMT deadline — the strict 4-page-plus-references format, double-anonymous rules and the pre-deadline anonymity period, scientific-area and metadata choices, the post-deadline paper-update window, dual-submission policy, and the desk-reject triggers specific to ISCA's flagship.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill interspeech-submission --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Interspeech Submission?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-interspeech-submission)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: interspeech-submission
description: Use when auditing an INTERSPEECH submission before the CMT deadline — the strict 4-page-plus-references format, double-anonymous rules and the pre-deadline anonymity period, scientific-area and metadata choices, the post-deadline paper-update window, dual-submission policy, and the desk-reject triggers specific to ISCA's flagship.
---
# INTERSPEECH Submission
Run this audit against the live author pages (Interspeech 2026 kept them under
interspeech2026.org → Calls / Author Resources), not against memory. Interspeech
re-issues its paper kit every cycle, and the format police here are unusually strict
because the whole review pipeline assumes a uniform 4-page object.
## The format contract
The regular Interspeech paper is **4 pages of content in two columns, plus one
additional page restricted to references and acknowledgments** (2025 wording;
confirm the 2026 kit). Nothing else goes on page 5. Consequences worth internalizing:
- There is no appendix escape hatch. Whatever reviewers must see lives in the 4 pages.
- Figures compete directly with argument; every plot must earn its column-inches.
- The Long Paper track (introduced for 2026; reported 8 pages + 2 reference pages)
has its own rules — do not mix the two templates.
- Use the official paper kit (LaTeX template on the conference site/Overleaf) with
fonts, margins, and the PDF checker untouched. Interspeech validates PDFs
mechanically at upload.
## Anonymity: stricter than you remember
Interspeech runs double-anonymous review, and since 2025 the policy has included an
**anonymity period that starts one month before the submission deadline** and lasts
until decisions: no non-anonymized version of the work may be posted online (arXiv
included) in that window. Audit for:
- Author names, affiliations, grant numbers, and lab-identifying acknowledgments
(acknowledgments generally wait for camera-ready).
- Demo and repository links that resolve to identifiable accounts — speech papers
leak identity through audio-sample pages more than through text.
- Self-citation phrasing ("our previous system [3]") and dataset names that only one
lab could hold.
- PDF metadata and embedded fonts carrying usernames.
## The paper-update window (Interspeech's oddest mechanic)
Interspeech allows the PDF to be **revised for a short window after the submission
deadline** — in 2026, submissions closed 25 February and paper updates were accepted
until 4 March. Title, authors, abstract, and area typically freeze at the deadline;
only the PDF may change. Plan for it deliberately:
| Days after deadline | Sanctioned use of the update window |
|---|---|
| 0–2 | Full-team proofread of the actually-submitted PDF |
| 2–5 | Fix typos, broken references, figure glitches, overfull boxes |
| 5–close | One final upload; verify the portal shows the new checksum/version |
Do not treat the window as a deadline extension for experiments — reviewers may be
bidding on the metadata you froze, and wholesale content swaps invite chair scrutiny.
## Metadata and area selection
- The scientific area you pick routes the paper to its reviewer pool; choose for the
claim, not the method (see `interspeech-topic-selection`).
- Abstract in CMT must match the PDF abstract; it is what reviewers bid on.
- Declare all authors at submission — post-deadline author changes are restricted.
- Answer dual-submission questions honestly: the same work may not sit under review
at another conference or journal simultaneously.
## Desk-reject triggers observed at this venue
- Fifth page containing anything beyond references/acknowledgments.
- Template tampering (margin, font, or line-spacing tricks) caught by the PDF check.
- Identity leakage anywhere in the PDF or linked material.
- Posting a de-anonymized preprint inside the anonymity period.
- Missing mandatory metadata fields or an invalid PDF at the CMT cutoff.
## Final 72 hours, in order
1. Rebuild the PDF from a clean clone; confirm the kit's checker passes.
2. Anonymity sweep: text, links, metadata, audio-demo pages, repo history.
3. Freeze metadata early on CMT — the portal slows near the cutoff.
4. Upload, download what CMT stored, and read *that* file end to end.
5. Diary the paper-update close date for the sanctioned typo pass.
## CMT field audit, one by one
Portal fields outlive the PDF — the Archive entry, review assignment, and
program are generated from them:
- **Title**: identical to the PDF, punctuation included; it freezes at the
deadline in most cycles.
- **Abstract**: paste from the PDF source, not from an old draft; reviewers bid
on this text.
- **Authors + order**: complete and final; adding an author later needs chair
intervention. Verify each co-author's CMT account email — collisions create
duplicate identities that break conflict detection.
- **Scientific area (+ any secondary)**: the routing decision from
`interspeech-topic-selection`; do not delegate it to whoever uploads.
- **Conflicts/domains**: list every co-author's institutional domains; missed
conflicts surface as review-integrity problems months later.
- **Policy checkboxes** (dual submission, ethics, anonymity attestations): read
the year's wording — the sentences change, and a false attestation is a
desk-reject with memory.
## If something goes wrong at the wire
- Portal outage or personal emergency at the cutoff: email the Technical Program
Chairs immediately with evidence; discretion exists but shrinks by the hour.
- Wrong file uploaded and the deadline passed: the paper-update window is your
sanctioned repair channel for the PDF — but metadata errors need a chair email.
- Discovered identity leak after the deadline: update the PDF within the window
and document the fix; do not silently hope.
## Output format
```text
[Submission verdict] ready / fixable / not ready
[Format] 4+1 compliance, template integrity, PDF checker result
[Anonymity] text / links / metadata / demo-page findings
[Metadata] area, abstract match, author list, dual-submission answers
[Update-window plan] <what will be checked before the update close>
[Blockers] <ordered list>
```
## Currency note
The 2026 anchor dates — portal open 17 January, deadline 25 February, update close
4 March, all for the Sydney edition — were checked 2026-07-08 via official-page
renderings (see `resources/official-source-map.md`). Every one of them is
cycle-specific; the 2027 São Paulo cycle will publish its own kit and calendar.
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!