paperlint 6.3.0 → 7.1.0

package/skills/submit-paper/references/venues/agenticdev.md

@@ -1,171 +0,0 @@
----
-title: "AgenticDev @ ASE — venue card (data)"
----
-
-# AgenticDev @ ASE venue card
-
-> **This is a venue DATA file, not a skill.** Follow the `submit-paper` skill for the end-to-end
-> mechanics; the facts below are the venue-specific data. (Formerly the `submit-paper-agenticdev` skill;
-> demoted to a reference doc so venue data doesn't proliferate the skill namespace.) **Re-verify the
-> CFP each year** (`conf.researchr.org/home/ase-2026/agenticdev-2026`).
-
-## The facts (2026 edition)
-
-- **Venue**: Workshop on Agentic AI for Next-Generation Software Development, co-located with **ASE**
-  (Automated Software Engineering), Munich, Oct 2026.
-- **HotCRP**: `https://agenticdev2026.hotcrp.com/paper/new`.
-- **Deadline**: **July 15, 2026, AoE** (≈ 9 AM July 16 at UTC+5). Notify Aug 21, camera-ready Aug 28.
-- **Types / limits**: Full ≤10pp (mature); **Short ≤5pp** (WIP / vision / position); Demo/Tool ≤5pp.
-  Up to **2 extra pages of references** on top.
-- **Format**: ACM `\documentclass[sigconf,review,anonymous]{acmart}` → **double-blind**. Build:
-  `pdflatex; bibtex; pdflatex; pdflatex`; add `\microtypesetup{expansion=false}` (the #1 acmart crash).
-- **Archival**: accepted papers → **ASE workshop proceedings, DOI**. 🔴 **Correction 2026-08-26: the
-  earlier wording "ACM DL / IEEE Xplore" is FALSE — there is no dual publication.** ASE's publisher
-  **alternates by year**: ASEW '24 — ACM (`10.1145/3691621.*`, ISBN 979-8-4007-1249-4), ASE 2025
-  Workshops — **IEEE** (`csdl/proceedings/asew/2025`, ISBN 979-8-3315-8503-7). The main track does the
-  same: '22 ACM, '23 IEEE, '24 ACM, '25 IEEE. The `10.5555` prefix in ACM DL is a Guide catalog
-  entry, NOT an ACM publication. By the alternation pattern, **ACM is expected for 2026**, which
-  lines up with an APC even being charged — but ⚠️ **no verbatim statement from ASE 2026 about the
-  publisher was found**. If it turns out to be IEEE, the ACM-APC question is moot entirely. Confirm
-  with the chairs before paying; selected papers
-  invited to a **journal special issue**. This is real authorship-criterion evidence.
-- **⚠️ No supplementary-material upload field** on the HotCRP form (fields are just Title, Submission,
-  Abstract, Authors, ACM corresponding, Contacts, PC conflicts). → **Host the artifact externally** (OSF
-  anonymized view-only link) and `\url{}` it in the paper's Availability. See `submit-paper` §2.
-- **Remote presentation**: CFP doesn't state a policy; what counts is the indexed
-  publication, not attendance. Only ask organizers about remote _after_ acceptance (don't draw attention
-  pre-decision under double-blind).
-
-## 🔴 How to name the venue — what CAN and CANNOT be claimed
-
-The question came up on 2026-08-24 and will come up every time (a post, a site, a résumé, an
-application). Checked against primary sources, not a search-engine summary.
-
-**Facts:**
-
-- **ASE is CORE A\*** (top tier), together with ICSE and FSE it's software engineering's "big
-  three."
-- **AgenticDev is an ASE 2026 workshop**, officially listed on ASE's own _Co-Located Events_ page
-  (`conf.researchr.org/track/ase-2026/ase-2026-workshops`). It is not a third-party conference
-  that rented a room nearby, and it is not "sponsorship" — the workshop runs under ASE's umbrella.
-- **Proceedings:** accepted papers go into the **ASE 2026 Workshop Proceedings** (ACM DL, DOI).
-- **But it is NOT the ASE main track.** The main track has its own program, its own PC, and its
-  own selectivity; the workshop is reviewed separately and more leniently.
-
-| ✅ OK to write                                           | ❌ NOT OK                            |
-| -------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------ |
-| "accepted at AgenticDev 2026, a workshop of ASE 2026"    | "accepted at ASE 2026"               |
-| "workshop paper, ASE 2026 workshop proceedings (ACM DL)" | "published at a CORE A\* conference" |
-| "ASE is CORE A\*; AgenticDev is one of its workshops"    | "my paper is CORE A\*"               |
-
-⚠️ **Why this isn't pedantry:** a mismatch in how the narrative is framed is a recorded reason
-reviewers reject any claimed credentials. A reviewer sees the "workshop vs. main track"
-distinction in one minute by checking the conference program, and the cost is trust in the whole
-application, not just one line. The phrasing "a workshop of ASE 2026" is not weaker — it carries
-ASE's weight on its own while staying accurate.
-
-## Attendance, registration, and proceedings — what affects what
-
-- **Traveling to present does NOT affect the credit.** What counts is _authorship of scholarly
-  articles_ — that is, **the publication**, not attendance. "Presented at a conference" isn't on
-  the list of countable achievements at all.
-- 🔴 **What DOES matter: whether payment becomes a condition of MAKING IT INTO proceedings.** Many
-  venues require at least one author to register, or the paper gets pulled from the proceedings.
-  In that case what disappears isn't the trip, it's the proof itself. That's the exact question
-  put to the chairs on 2026-08-24, and it matters more than the money.
-- Cost for 2026: **APC $350** (ACM went fully open-access as of 2026-01-01) + registration €350
-  (early rate through 08-31). The correspondence with the chairs is broken down in the author's
-  private notes (`<paper>/reviews/2026-08-24-perepiska-cheyry.md`).
-
-## PC members (for the "PC conflicts" field) — 2026
-
-Andrea Rosani (Free U Bozen/Bolzano) · Giuseppe Di Fatta (Free U Bozen/Bolzano) · Jean Marie Mottu
-(Nantes U) · Paolo Papotti (Eurecom) · Simos Gerasimou (Cyprus U of Technology). An independent author
-with no ties to any of them checks **none**. (List grows year to year — read the current PC page.)
-
-## Topic fit (foreground these in the framing)
-
-Trustworthiness / verification / validation of AI agents; benchmarking & empirical evaluation;
-integration into developer workflows; agent-based coding/testing. A cost-aware, correctness-gated
-_validation_ paper is dead-center — name those keywords in the abstract/intro.
-
-## After acceptance — the prestige upgrade
-
-AgenticDev is a workshop (lightest authorship tier, but it counts). Extend the accepted paper (≥30% new
-material) into a higher-prestige indexed venue as a **second** publication: **MSR 2027** (deadline
-~Oct 23, 2026) or **NeurIPS 2027 Evaluations & Datasets** (~May 2027). AgenticDev explicitly invites
-journal extensions. Don't dual-submit the same paper — extend it.
-
-## Provenance
-
-"Measuring the Wrong Number" submitted here 2026-07-13 (#20, ready-for-review), 4pp short paper, OSF
-anonymized artifact linked in Availability, PC-panel estimate ~85–90% accept.
-
-## Camera-ready (2026 edition)
-
-**The ACM mechanics are generic and live one level up: `../publishers/acm.md`** (eRights first,
-the preamble, the copyright block, CCS, source files). Here — only what's specific to AgenticDev:
-
-- **Camera-ready deadline**: **28 Aug 2026, 2 PM AoE** (≈ 7 AM on August 29 at UTC+5).
-- **DOI**: `10.1145/3843282.3843715` · **ACM ISBN**: `979-8-4007-2985-0/26/10`.
-- **Copyright block**: `AgenticDev '26, October 12–16, 2026, Munich, Germany`.
-- **No longer double-blind.** The submission used `[sigconf,review,anonymous]`; both options come
-  off for the final.
-- **Same page limit**: body ≤5 pp + up to 2 pp for references only. A sixth page taken up by the
-  bibliography still counts within the limit.
-- **Title changes are allowed** — the portal explicitly asks for it "exactly as it should appear
-  in the ACM DL." But decide before eRights (see the publisher card).
-
-## Attendance and the talk (2026 edition)
-
-**Every year: the deadline and the upload channel come from the parent conference's
-not-in-person page, not from this card.** Look that page up again for the new edition; the dates
-below are 2026's.
-
-**Remote is allowed, but there is no live slot.** On 2026-08-27 the chairs told accepted authors
-who cannot travel (by email) that the workshop adopts ASE 2026's
-[Not-in-Person Presentations](https://conf.researchr.org/track/ase-2026/ase-2026-not-in-person-presentations)
-policy. That page, verbatim:
-
-> ASE 2026 does not provide presentation slots for papers that are not presented in-person by one
-> of the authors.
-
-Instead the author sends:
-
-| artifact  | what the page says                                                                                                                | deadline (2026)                                                                    |
-| --------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
-| video     | "made available via a dedicated page on the conference website (recommendation: 10 min duration, mp4 file format, HD resolution)" | 2026-10-08 (ASE page; the chairs first asked for 10-01, then deferred to the page) |
-| one-slide | "shown during one of the conference sessions"; no size or format stated                                                           | same as the video                                                                  |
-| poster    | optional for the workshop; ASE prints it                                                                                          | ASE page: 2026-09-21                                                               |
-
-**Where to upload.** The page says: "find the submission link on the submission page for your paper
-(see author-kit e-mail from Conference Publishing Consulting)". That is the same personal page used
-for the camera-ready. On it, the block "Optional Archive/Appendix/Video/Picture Submissions … Submit
-Material to ACM" uploads straight into the ACM system, once per file. "All submitted material will be
-published in the ACM DL if the publishing-rights agreement gives permission for this", so tick
-permission for auxiliary material when filling in eRights. Asked where to send the files, the
-chairs answered (2026-10-01) only with a link to the ASE page, so the page governs: channel and
-deadline both come from it, and email attachments are not needed.
-
-**The slot.** Per the chairs' email to all authors (2026-09-29), a short paper gets 10 minutes in
-total: approximately 6–7 for the presentation and 3–4 for questions. It is stated as approximate,
-with no minimum.
-
-**Q&A for a remote author.** No source requires live attendance or a live answer; none confirms
-email Q&A either. Put a contact address on the video's last slide and on the one-slide.
-
-**Registration is still required** and still a **publication gate**, not a travel expense:
-workshop-day registration (non-member) €350 through 08-31, €410 through 09-20, €460 on-site.
-If entry requires a visa, ask the chairs right after acceptance.
-
-The `talk` rules check the finished files against these numbers: `docs/talk.md`.
-
-## 🤖 Machine-readable format profile
-
-Read by ESLint rules over `<paper>/_build/paper.facts.json` (the facts are captured by
-`extract-pdf-facts.mjs`). **The numbers live here, not in code** — this venue has its own, the
-next one will have different ones. Source: the Conference Publishing author instructions
-(2026-08-25) and ACM's requirements.
-
-**The format profile is in [`agenticdev.yaml`](agenticdev.yaml)** next to this file. Data lives
-there, prose lives here.

package/skills/submit-paper/references/venues/aisec.md

@@ -1,105 +0,0 @@
----
-title: "AISec @ ACM CCS — venue card (data)"
----
-
-# AISec @ ACM CCS venue card
-
-> **This is a venue DATA file, not a skill.** Follow the `submit-paper` skill for the end-to-end
-> mechanics; the facts below are the venue-specific data. (Formerly the `submit-paper-aisec` skill;
-> demoted to a reference doc so venue data doesn't proliferate the skill namespace.) **Re-verify the
-> CFP each year** (`https://aisec.cc/`) — deadline, page limit, and tracks shift year to year.
-
-## The bar (read this first)
-
-AISec is **not** a first-edition welcoming workshop. It is the long-running AI-security workshop of
-**ACM CCS — a top-4 security conference** — so calibrate to a _harder_ bar than a fresh workshop:
-mature threat modeling, honest evaluation, and airtight ethics are table stakes, not bonuses. A
-security PC rejects on soundness and ethics grounds that a SE workshop would wave through.
-
-## The facts (2026 edition)
-
-- **Venue**: ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security (**AISec**), co-located with **ACM
-  CCS** (Computer and Communications Security).
-- **Deadline**: **24 July 2026** (verify the AoE cutoff, and convert it into your own zone, on the CFP each cycle).
-- **Types / tracks**: **full research papers**; **benchmark papers** (new evaluation frameworks /
-  datasets **with artifact sharing** — a first-class track, not an afterthought); **position / SoK**
-  (systematization-of-knowledge) papers. Pick the track and pitch to _its_ bar.
-- **Format**: ACM double-column (`sigconf`), up to **~10pp**. Build:
-  `pdflatex; bibtex; pdflatex; pdflatex`; add `\microtypesetup{expansion=false}` (the #1 acmart crash).
-- **Blind model**: **double-blind** — `\documentclass[sigconf,review,anonymous]{acmart}`, author
-  `Anonymous Author(s)`. See `submit-paper` §0/§4 for de-anon hygiene.
-- **Archival**: accepted papers → **CCS workshop proceedings in the ACM Digital Library** (DOI). Real
-  indexed-authorship evidence, at a top-tier-security-adjacent venue.
-- **⚠️ No supplementary-material upload field** on the form. → **Host the artifact externally,
-  anonymized** (OSF private project + anonymized view-only link) and `\url{}` it in Availability. See
-  `submit-paper` §2 and `paper-pipeline/references/anonymization.md`.
-
-## Security-venue specifics that DECIDE acceptance (this is the whole game here)
-
-1. **Threat-model soundness.** Name the **attacker** explicitly and their **capabilities** (what they
-   observe, what they control, their goal, their budget). **Separate accidental failure from an
-   adaptive adversary** — "the model gets it wrong sometimes" and "a motivated attacker steers it" are
-   different papers; conflating them is the classic security-PC reject. Put the threat model up front,
-   not in a footnote.
-2. **Ethics / responsible disclosure — CRITICAL, a hard reject-vector.**
-   - **Anonymize studied third parties too**, not just yourself. Do **not** punch down on named
-     maintainers/projects — aggregate the stats and use anonymized IDs (e.g. `G01…G46`) for the
-     entities you studied.
-   - **Disclose findings to affected parties BEFORE any de-anonymized release.** The paper must state
-     the disclosure timeline and that a **release gate** blocks publishing de-anonymized data until
-     disclosure completes.
-   - No supplementary slot → the anonymized artifact on **OSF** must itself be leak-clean (the released
-     files, not just the PDF). A named-entity leak in the _artifact_ is invisible to a paper-only read
-     and is the single highest reject-vector — see Provenance.
-3. **Dual-use.** If you publish an **evasion / attack technique, publish its fix in the same paper** —
-   net-defensive framing. A security PC will reject a pure attack recipe with no mitigation as
-   irresponsible; the same result framed as "here is the weakness AND how to close it" is a
-   contribution.
-4. **GenAI-use disclosure.** ACM/CCS require disclosing how generative AI was used in producing the
-   work (writing, code, experiments). Add the disclosure statement; don't omit it.
-
-## Track fit (foreground these in the framing)
-
-Adversarial ML, ML for security / security for ML, LLM/agent safety and security, evaluation &
-benchmarking of AI-security defenses, poisoning/evasion/extraction, and **rigorous measurement of
-whether a claimed safety mechanism actually holds**. A benchmark/measurement paper that ships a
-reusable eval framework + an anonymized artifact is dead-center for the **benchmark track** — name
-those keywords in the abstract/intro and cite the track by name.
-
-## After acceptance — the prestige upgrade
-
-AISec@CCS is a workshop, but co-located with a top-4 venue it is the strongest workshop tier a
-dossier can hold. Extend the accepted paper (≥30% new material) into a higher-prestige indexed venue as
-a **second** publication — e.g. a full security conference or a journal. Don't dual-submit the same
-paper; extend it. Plan the **camera-ready de-anonymization + release gate** at acceptance (see
-`camera-ready`).
-
-## Provenance
-
-"Safety Theater in Agentic Coding" hardened for this venue (PC-panel estimate **~87–88%** accept). Its
-accept **hinged on closing an ethics reject-vector**: the released artifact had named **46 maintainers**
-— a paper-only review missed it; the `pc-panel-review` artifact-runner + ethics lens caught it. Fixed
-by **anonymized provenance (`G01–G46`)** plus a **release gate** blocking de-anonymized release until
-disclosure completes. Lesson baked into this card: at a security venue the two things that most move
-the decision — an ethics/disclosure contradiction and an anonymization leak — live in the **artifact**,
-so verify the shipped files, not just the PDF.
-
-## Compose with
-
-- `submit-paper` (mechanics: HotCRP form, OSF hosting, "ready for review", PDF-only, profile, dossier notes).
-- `camera-ready` (de-anonymization + the release gate after acceptance).
-- `pc-panel-review` — run it LAST as the gate, and specifically field its **ethics lens** and
-  **artifact-runner lens** (stress-test the release gate: plant a leak, confirm it's caught).
-- Canonical shared detail: `paper-pipeline/references/artifact-checklist.md` (artifact build) and
-  `paper-pipeline/references/anonymization.md` (de-anon deny-list + verify).
-
-## Camera-ready
-
-AISec is also **ACM** (a CCS workshop), so the final's mechanics are generic and live in
-**`../publishers/acm.md`**: eRights is filled in FIRST and requires the final title; the preamble
-is converted out of submission mode (`printacmref=false` / `setcopyright{none}` /
-`pagestyle{plain}` / the `review` option — all of it removed); Source files are mandatory
-alongside the PDF; CCS codes come from the 2012 CCS Browser.
-
-What's AISec's own — its own DOI/ISBN, its own venue line in the copyright block, and its own
-dates: fill those in here once they arrive (the card gets filled in from fact, not from memory).

package/skills/submit-paper/references/venues/realm.md

@@ -1,155 +0,0 @@
-# REALM @ EMNLP — venue card
-
-**Family: ACL.** Everything ACL-wide (appendix rule, Limitations/Ethics not counting, anonymity,
-OpenReview mechanics) lives in `paper-pipeline/references/acl-venue-rules.md`. Only REALM-specific
-facts are here.
-
-Verified by direct fetch of `realm-workshop.github.io/call_for_papers` **2026-08-02 and 2026-08-03**
-(twice, independently), plus a live pull of the OpenReview invitation schema.
-🔴 **Re-verify every cycle** — dates, limits and tracks move year to year.
-
-## The 2026 edition (2nd edition)
-
-| field                      | value                                                                                                         |
-| -------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
-| full name                  | REALM — workshop at EMNLP 2026                                                                                |
-| edition                    | **2nd** (a 1st-edition accepted corpus exists — mine it with `study-accepted-papers`, in SETUP)               |
-| direct submission deadline | **Wednesday 5 August 2026**, 23:59 **AoE**                                                                    |
-| → in the author's zone     | at UTC+5: **6 August 2026, 16:59** (AoE = UTC−12; 5 Aug 23:59 AoE = 6 Aug 11:59 UTC)                          |
-| ARR commitment deadline    | 31 August 2026, same AoE convention                                                                           |
-| long paper                 | **8 pages of content**                                                                                        |
-| short paper                | 4 pages of content                                                                                            |
-| refs + appendices          | **unlimited**                                                                                                 |
-| camera-ready               | **+1 page** (9 long / 5 short)                                                                                |
-| archival                   | optional at submission; archival → **ACL Anthology proceedings**                                              |
-| blind                      | **double-blind** — names and affiliations omitted                                                             |
-| preprints                  | explicitly allowed, any time, provided the PDF does not link to de-anonymised info                            |
-| portal                     | `openreview.net/group?id=EMNLP/2026/Workshop/REALM`                                                           |
-| format                     | **PDF only**                                                                                                  |
-| mandatory sections         | none beyond ACL's Limitations; _"authors are expected to attest to the ethical considerations in their work"_ |
-| venue mode                 | hybrid; held Thursday 29 October, 9:00–17:30, Room P1                                                         |
-
-## 🔴 The submission form has NO supplementary field
-
-Pulled live from `api2.openreview.net/invitations?id=EMNLP/2026/Workshop/REALM/-/Submission`. The
-form's **complete** field list:
-
-```
-title · authors · authorids · keywords · TLDR · abstract · pdf ·
-archival · cross_submission_to · serve_as_reviewer · venue · venueid
-```
-
-There is **no Responsible NLP Checklist and no supplementary upload**. Two consequences:
-
-1. **The artifact must be hosted externally and anonymously**, with the URL inside the PDF. Budget
-   time for this — it is a submission blocker, and an artifact reviewer will refuse the Available
-   badge without a resolving URL.
-2. Do not confuse this route with **ARR**, whose portal _does_ have the checklist and separate
-   software/data uploads. Different portal, different process. A previous version of this project's
-   checklist conflated them.
-3. **No checklist field means no LLM-disclosure gate here**, and therefore no required placement for
-   it — put the disclosure in Limitations or Ethical considerations, both outside the page limit,
-   and keep it out of the reader's first contact with a measurement. Full rule, with the policy text
-   and the failure it was written from: `paper-pipeline/references/acl-venue-rules.md`, §GenAI / LLM
-   disclosure.
-
-Note `keywords` is a form field, so the keyword line does **not** belong in the typeset PDF.
-
-## The submission form, field by field (filled 2026-08-06, ~15 min before deadline)
-
-Transcribed from the live form while filling it. The API schema above lists field _names_; this is
-what the form actually shows, in order, with what each one wants. A field's help text is quoted.
-
-| #   | field                   | required | type                                         | what goes in                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
-| --- | ----------------------- | -------- | -------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
-| 1   | **Title**               | ✱        | one line                                     | _"Add TeX formulas using $In-line$ or $$Block$$"_ — plain text otherwise. **Must match the PDF's title exactly**; a late title edit in the paper means re-uploading the PDF _and_ retyping this                                                |
-| 2   | **Authors**             | ✱        | profile search                               | pre-filled with the submitting author. _"All authors must have an OpenReview profile prior to submitting"_ — a co-author without an active profile blocks the whole submission                                                                 |
-| 3   | **Keywords**            | ✱        | comma-separated                              | free text, no controlled vocabulary. 🔴 **Because this is a form field, the keyword line does NOT belong in the typeset PDF**                                                                                                                  |
-| 4   | **TL;DR**               | —        | one sentence, 🔴 **hard max 250 characters** | _"a short sentence describing your paper"_. The limit is **not in the help text** — it rejects on submit. Optional, but it is the first thing a bidding reviewer reads: name the mechanism, not the topic. Count the characters before pasting |
-| 5   | **Abstract**            | ✱        | markdown + TeX, Write/Preview tabs           | paste the paper's abstract. Markdown emphasis renders; `**bold**` survives. Backticks render as code                                                                                                                                           |
-| 6   | **PDF**                 | ✱        | file upload                                  | _"Upload a PDF file that ends with .pdf"_. No supplementary field anywhere on the form — see above                                                                                                                                             |
-| 7   | **Archival**            | ✱        | radio: Archival / Non-archival               | Archival → **ACL Anthology**. _"If your paper is a cross-submission (currently under review or already published at another venue), it cannot be archival, per ACL policies."_ Changeable at camera-ready                                      |
-| 8   | **Cross Submission To** | —        | one line                                     | leave **empty** unless the paper is genuinely under review elsewhere. Filling it forfeits archival                                                                                                                                             |
-| 9   | **Serve As Reviewer**   | ✱        | profile search                               | _"reciprocal reviewing practice… nominate at least one author to serve as a reviewer using their OpenReview profile ID (e.g. ~First_Last1)"_. **A solo author nominates themself** — the field is required and there is nobody else            |
-| 10  | License                 | ✱        | fixed chip                                   | **CC BY 4.0**, not editable                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
-| 11  | Readers                 | ✱        | fixed chips                                  | `EMNLP 2026 Workshop REALM` + `authorids`                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
-| 12  | Signatures              | ✱        | fixed chip                                   | the submitting author                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
-
-Then **Submit** / Cancel. An Edit History block below repeats Readers + Signatures — informational.
-
-🔴 **The displayed deadline is NOT when writes stop.** An OpenReview invitation carries two dates
-and the interface shows only the first:
-
-| field                                                          | 2026 edition, UTC | at UTC+5  |
-| -------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------- | --------- |
-| `duedate` — printed everywhere as the deadline                 | 2026-08-06 11:59  | **16:59** |
-| `expdate` — when the invitation actually stops accepting edits | 2026-08-06 12:29  | **17:29** |
-
-A **30-minute grace window**, undocumented in the CFP and invisible on the form. Read it before the
-last hour, not after — it is the difference between shipping a fix and abandoning it:
-
-```
-curl -sS "https://api2.openreview.net/invitations?id=<VENUE-PATH>/-/Submission" \
-  | python3 -c "import json,sys,datetime;[print(k, datetime.datetime.utcfromtimestamp(i[k]/1000)) \
-    for i in json.load(sys.stdin)['invitations'] for k in ('duedate','expdate') if i.get(k)]"
-```
-
-Do **not** plan around it — a venue may set `expdate == duedate`, and 30 minutes is not a schedule.
-Treat it as recovery room for a defect found at the buzzer. Re-read it every cycle.
-
-**Traps hit for real:**
-
-- 🔴 **The title lives in two places and they silently diverge.** A title change at T−14 min meant a
-  fresh PDF _and_ a retyped Title field. Change the paper first, rebuild, then fill the form — never
-  the other way round.
-- 🔴 **"Serve As Reviewer" surprises solo authors, and it is not a formality — it enrols you.** It reads
-  as though it wants a colleague. It is required, and the answer for a one-author paper is your own
-  profile ID. **The day after submitting, the program chairs assign papers and set a review deadline**
-  (2026: submissions 5 Aug, reviews due 21 Aug AoE — sixteen days). Consequences to price in BEFORE
-  submitting, not after:
-  - **ACL's AI policy applies to the reviews.** Verbatim from the chairs' email: _"the use of
-    generative AI tools to write an entire review is prohibited. While such tools may be used for
-    minor editing (e.g., grammar or clarity), the content and assessment must be the reviewer's own."_
-    Every review hour is personal. The sanction for violating it lands on submissions to the next ARR
-    cycle — the same ecosystem the paper is in.
-  - **The workshop's PC roster is not published**, so the only durable proof of the service is a
-    Web of Science verified-review record: forward the chairs' thank-you email to
-    `reviews@webofscience.com`. Set that profile up BEFORE reviewing, not after.
-  - It is nonetheless a real judging credential, distinct from authorship. One submission closes two
-    criteria — but the reviewing window is not negotiable and may collide with other commitments.
-
-  🔴 **Hit for real on `compile-rules-2026`.** This project had _decided on 2026-07-26 not to serve as
-  a REALM reviewer_, with three written reasons (no public roster, the window collides with an ASPLOS
-  artifact round, the AI policy makes it all personal hours). Eleven days later the required form field
-  enrolled him anyway, because the field was filled in from a submission checklist that did not know
-  about the decision. **A required form field can silently reverse a recorded decision.** Before
-  filling any required field, check whether the project has already decided that question.
-
-- **Keywords are a form field, not paper content** — so anything in the PDF's keyword line is
-  duplicated dead weight. Keep the list in a non-typeset comment in the source and paste it here.
-- **The abstract field accepts markdown**, so the source abstract can be pasted nearly verbatim.
-  Extracting it from the _built PDF_ instead is a mistake: a text extractor on the line-numbered
-  build interleaves the margin numbers and silently drops paragraphs.
-
-## The ARR route is not a free fallback
-
-The 31 August "ARR commitment" deadline commits a paper **that has already been reviewed by ACL
-Rolling Review**. It is not a second chance for a paper that was never submitted to ARR — that needs
-an ARR submission first, on ARR's own cycle. Do not plan around it without checking the ARR calendar.
-
-## Gotchas hit for real
-
-- **Deadline confusion.** The CFP prints "August 5th" and states the AoE rule in a _different_
-  sentence on the same page. A pass on 2026-07-31 concluded "AoE not stated, assume noon 5 Aug" and
-  was wrong by 29 hours. Read the whole page, then convert.
-- **OpenReview profile moderation is the critical path**, not the writing. An independent author with
-  no institutional email and no DBLP record has no expedite route. Start the profile weeks ahead.
-- The workshop's hybrid status is confirmed by REALM's **own** root page — do not carry it over from
-  EMNLP's general page.
-
-## Sources
-
-- `realm-workshop.github.io/call_for_papers` — CFP (fetched 2026-08-02, 2026-08-03)
-- `realm-workshop.github.io/` — root, hybrid confirmation
-- `api2.openreview.net/invitations?id=…/-/Submission` — the live form schema
-- Per-paper compliance state: `<paper-dir>/SUBMIT-CHECKLIST.md`