Q. Can we please have an extension on the deadline?
A. NO. And any incomplete submission or a submission not meeting required criteria will be deleted.
Q. Can we add/remove/reorder authors after the paper submission deadline?
A. It's not possible to add/remove authors after the supplementary material deadline, though the author order can be changed until the camera ready deadline.
Q. Can we get my quota increased for the size of paper submission from 50 MB to something higher?
A. NO. We have set hard limits of 50MB (PDF Only) for paper submission and 200MB (PDF or ZIP only) for supplementary materials on submissions for review. As we are expecting many submissions, and as each reviewer is expected to review multiple papers, larger file downloads (and uploads) will tax the system and abilities of reviewers to get to the papers fast enough. Authors should consider adding hi-res images as supplementary material (see supplementary material guidelines).
Q. Can we submit color images with our papers for review?
A. YES. Reviewers will get the exact pdf file of the paper you submitted, so they can see the color images on the screen. Do be warned though that many reviewers still like to read printed papers and not all have access to high-end color printers. Please make sure to comment in the paper to request the reviewers to see the color online copy.
Q. How do I obtain my paper ID?
A. After creating a new submission in the OpenReview system, you will see your paper ID. Please update your PDF accordingly and upload the PDF with the paper ID.
Q. What is the 3DV 2025 policy on DUAL SUBMISSIONS?
A. Please read the dual/double submission paragraph here.
Q. Does a Technical Report (departmental, arXiv, etc.) available online count as a prior publication, and therefore is that work ineligible for review and publication at 3DV 2025?
A. Please read the dual/double submission paragraph here.
Q. Does my submission need to cite arXiv papers that are related to my work?
A. Consistent with good academic practice, you need to cite all sources that inspired and informed your own work. This said, asking authors to thoroughly compare their work with arXiv reports that appeared shortly before the submission deadline imposes an unreasonable burden. We also do not wish to discourage the publication of similar ideas that have been developed independently and concurrently. Authors and reviewers should keep the following guidelines in mind:
· Authors are not required to discuss and compare their work with recent arXiv reports, although they must properly cite those that inspired them.
· To reduce confusion, whenever citing papers that initially appeared on arXiv, the authors should check whether those papers had subsequently been published in a peer-reviewed venue, and to cite those versions accordingly.
· Failing to cite an arXiv paper or failing to beat its performance SHOULD NOT be sole grounds for rejection.
· Reviewers SHOULD NOT reject a paper solely because another paper with a similar idea has already appeared on arXiv. If the reviewer suspects plagiarism or academic dishonesty, they are encouraged to bring these concerns to the attention of Area and Program Chairs.
· It is acceptable for a reviewer to suggest that an author should acknowledge or be aware of something on arXiv.
Q. Does a document on GitHub or other open repositories count as a publication, and therefore is ineligible for review and publication at 3DV 2025?
A. Submissions to GitHub and similar repositories cannot be rejected and are accepted by default before any “review” that can take place on such platforms. Given definitions in the dual/double submission paragraph here, GitHub documents are not publications and won't be treated as such. To preserve anonymity, you should not cite your public codebase. You can say that the code will be made publicly available.
Q. Does a presentation at a departmental seminar during the review period violate the anonymity standard or other 3DV 2025 policy?
A. NO. Authors must properly anonymize the written submission as per the guidelines. There is no requirement that the material otherwise be kept confidential during the review process.
Q. Can I promote my paper in the press or on social media?
Please read the social media paragraph here.
Q. How do I cite my results reported in open challenges?
A. To conform with the double-blind review policy, you can report results of other challenge participants together with your results in your paper. For your results, however, you should not identify yourself and should not mention your participation in the challenge. Instead present your results referring to the method proposed in your paper and draw conclusions based on the experimental comparison to other results.
Q. Is the 3DV 2025 Review Process CONFIDENTIAL?
A. Please read the confidentiality paragraph here.
Q. Are 3DV 2025 Reviews Double BLIND or Single BLIND?
A. Please read the double blind review paragraph here.
Q. Is code submission required?
A. No, it is completely optional.
Q. Does submitted code need to be anonymized?
A. 3DV is a double blind conference, so authors should make a reasonable effort to anonymize the submitted code and data. This means that author names, institution names and licenses should be removed. If the paper gets accepted, we expect the authors to replace the submitted code by a non-anonymized version or link to a public github repository.
Q. Are anonymous github links allowed?
A. Yes. However, they have to be on a branch that will not be modified after the submission deadline. Please enter the github link in a standalone text file in a submitted zip file.
Q. How will the submitted code be used for decision-making?
A. The submitted code will be used as additional evidence provided by the authors to add more credibility to their results. We anticipate that high quality papers whose results are judged by our reviewers to be credible will be accepted to 3DV, even if code is not submitted. However, if something is unclear in the paper, then code, if submitted, will provide an extra chance for reviewers to verify it.
Q. If code is submitted, do you expect it to be published with the rest of the supplementary? Or, could it be withdrawn later?
A. We expect submitted code to be published with the rest of the supplementary. However, if the paper gets accepted, then the authors will get a chance to update the code before it is published by adding author names, licenses, etc.
Q. Do you expect the code to be standalone? For example, what if it is part of a much bigger codebase?
A. We expect your code to be readable and helpful to reviewers in verifying the credibility of your results. It is possible to do this through code that is not standalone – for example, with proper documentation.
Q. What about pseudocode instead of code? Does that count as code submission?
A. Yes, we will count detailed pseudocode as code submission as it is helpful to reviewers in validating the credibility of your results.
Q. Do you expect authors to submit data?
A. We understand that many of our authors work with highly sensitive datasets and are not asking for private data submission. If the dataset used is publicly available, there is no need to provide it. If the dataset is private, then the authors can submit a toy or simulated dataset to illustrate how the code works.
Q. Who has access to my code? For how long?
A. Only the reviewers and Area Chair assigned to your paper will have access to your code. We will instruct the reviewers and Area Chair to keep the code submissions confidential (just like the paper submissions), and delete all code submissions from their machine at the end of the review cycle. Please note that code submission is also completely voluntary.
Q. I would like to revise my code/add code during author feedback. Is this permitted?
A. Unfortunately, no. But please remember that code submission is entirely optional.
| Paper Submission | August 12, 2024 | |
|---|---|---|
| Suppl. Material | August 19, 2024 | |
| Paper Notification | November 05, 2024 | |
| Main conference | March 25-28, 2025 |
