CHI Workflow

CHI is a one-shot annual venue with a two-round review inside the cycle. The dates below are the CHI 2027 calendar as posted on chi2027.acm.org and read on 2026-07-08 via search renderings (the site refuses direct automated fetches); treat them as this cycle's plan and reverify on the live page at each stage.

The CHI 2027 calendar

Date	Stage	Who must act
2026-07-30	PCS submission site opens	Submitting author sets up the record early
2026-09-10 (Thu)	Full papers due — including videos and supplementary	Everyone; no separate abstract deadline was posted
~late Oct / early Nov 2026 (待核实)	Round-1 outcome: revise-and-resubmit invitation or reject	1AC/2AC verdict arrives; clear your calendar if invited
2026-12-03	Revised paper + author response due (≈5 weeks after round-1)	Whole author team, on a fixed clock
2026-12-17	Final notification after round 2 / PC meeting	—
2027-01-14	Camera-ready source due in ACM TAPS	Paper lead + whoever owns LaTeX/Word source
2027-02-18	Publication-ready deadline on PCS (final materials, supplemental, optional video preview)	Paper lead
2027-03-04	Registration deadline + video presentation deadline	Presenting author + grant admin
2027-05-10 – 05-14	CHI 2027, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA	Presenter

Two structural facts drive all planning: everything is due on September 10 — CHI gives no later supplement or video slot — and the December 3 revision window is only five weeks long, landing across November holidays for much of the community.

Working backwards from September 10

• T−16 weeks (mid-May): study data collection finished. A CHI paper whose study is still running in July will submit an under-analyzed paper.
• T−10 weeks: analysis locked; contribution type and subcommittee choices drafted (chi-topic-selection); skeleton of the paper written.
• T−6 weeks: full draft exists; video figure storyboarded. Video production, captioning, and consent checks for footage reliably take three weeks.
• T−3 weeks: internal "mock 1AC" read by someone outside the project; fix the contribution statement before polishing prose.
• T−1 week: run the chi-submission audit; upload a complete package to PCS and re-download it. PCS accepts revisions until the deadline, so upload early and overwrite.

Pre-positioning for the five-week revision

The revise-and-resubmit window cannot be extended, so buy time before it opens:

Before round-1 results arrive (October):
[ ] Keep the study environment alive — do not archive the analysis pipeline,
    delete participant contact channels, or let IRB approval lapse; a small
    follow-up analysis is the most common revision request you can predict.
[ ] Pre-agree author availability for the five weeks around Nov-Dec.
[ ] Set up the tracked-changes toolchain now (latexdiff or Word tracking)
    so day 1 of the window is spent revising, not configuring.
[ ] Draft the response-letter template with one section per reviewer.

If invited, treat it as a real second round, not a formality: at CHI as much as half of revised papers can still be rejected at the PC meeting (the posted process warns up to 50%; at CHI 2026, 65.5% of resubmissions were accepted). See chi-author-response.

The post-acceptance chain is longer than at most venues

Acceptance in December starts a four-deadline pipeline — TAPS source (January), publication-ready PCS package with accessibility metadata (February), registration and the presentation video (March), then the conference (May). Each has a different owner and a different failure mode; assign names in December, not February. Details in chi-camera-ready.

Risk register for the cycle

Risk	Window	Mitigation
Study slips past May	Spring	Cut scope to a short paper rather than submit thin data
Video figure unfinished at deadline	September	Storyboard at T−6 weeks; captions are mandatory work, not polish
Round-1 invite lands during travel/holidays	Oct–Dec	Availability pact signed in October
Requested analysis impossible (data deleted, IRB lapsed)	Nov	Keep the pipeline warm until December 17
TAPS rejects source formatting	January	Compile on the ACM class early; do not hand-hack the PDF
Missing alt text blocks publication-ready sign-off	February	Write figure descriptions during drafting, not after acceptance
Nobody registered by March 4	March	Registration owner named at acceptance

If the December answer is no

Rejected CHI papers have a well-worn afterlife: the reviews map cleanly onto CSCW (different deadline rhythm), DIS, IUI, or a TOCHI journal submission where length limits will not pinch. Do the re-route triage within two weeks of the decision while the reviews are fresh — see the venue table in chi-topic-selection — and log which criticisms were CHI-specific versus substantive.

Output format

[Cycle] CHI 2027 (papers due 2026-09-10; verified 2026-07-08, reverify live)
[Today → next gate] <stage name, days remaining>
[Stage owners] submission: <name> / revision: <name> / TAPS: <name> / registration: <name>
[Top calendar risk] <risk + mitigation from the register>
[Fallback venue] <where this goes if December says no>