EICS 2024 is the sixteenth international ACM SIGCHI conference devoted to engineering interactive computing systems and their user interfaces, addressing one or more software quality factors, such as usability, user experience, reliability, security, etc. Work presented at EICS covers all stages of the engineering life-cycle of interactive systems - inception, requirements, design, specification, coding, data analytics, validation and verification, deployment and maintenance.
EICS has the the longest tradition of bringing together researchers who contribute to better ways of creating interactive computing systems, stemming from the conference on command languages in the seventies. The conference is best known for rigorously contributing and disseminating research results that hold the midst in between user interface design, software engineering and computational interaction.
EICS focuses on models, languages, notations, methods, techniques and tools that support designing, developing, validating and verifying interactive systems. The conference brings together people who study or practice the engineering of interactive systems, drawing from design, HCI, software engineering, requirements engineering, software development, modeling, and programming.
Submissions advance the state of the art of the engineering of interactive systems. Topics include, but are not limited to:
A newcomer’s guide to EICS is available in the paper by López Jaquero et al.
The reviewing process for full papers follows the Proceedings of the ACM (PACM) model. The submission and review process will take place three times annually, and accepted papers will be published in issues of the PACM on Human-Computer Interaction journal. More can be found at http://eics.acm.org/pacm.
Full Papers should be written in the ACM format, see: ACM.
The PACM-EICS submission deadline for the Second round of submissions is 24th October 2022. Papers are submitted using https://new.precisionconference.com
The papers review process is based on reviewing where the identities of both the authors and reviewers are kept hidden (but ACs know these details). Authors are expected to remove author and institutional identities from the title and header areas of the paper, as noted in the submission instructions (Note: changing the text color of the author information is not sufficient). Also, please make sure that identifying information does not appear in the document’s meta-data (e.g., the ‘Authors’ field in your word processor’s ‘Save As’ dialog box). In addition, we require that the acknowledgments section be left blank as it could also easily identify the authors and/or their institution.
Further suppression of identity in the body of the paper is left to the authors’ discretion. We do expect that authors leave citations to their previous work unanonymized so that reviewers can ensure that all previous research has been taken into account by the authors. However, authors are required to cite their own work in the third person, e.g., avoid “As described in our previous work , ... ” and use instead “As described by , ...”
If you for some very specific reasons have challenges with writing the paper in an anonymous way, please contact the track chairs you are planning to submit to and ask for advice. In order to ensure the fairness of the reviewing process, we use a review process where external reviewers don’t know the identity of authors, and authors don’t know the identity of external reviewers. In the past few years, some authors have decided to publish their submissions in public archives prior to or during the review process. These public archives have surpassed in reach and publicity what used to happen with tech reports published in institutional repositories. The consequence is that well-informed external reviewers may know, without searching for it, the full identity and institutional affiliation of the authors of a submission they are reviewing. While reviewers should not actively seek information about author identity, complete anonymization is difficult and can be made more so by publication and promotion of work during the review process. While publication in public archives is becoming standard across many fields, authors should be aware that unconscious biases can affect the nature of reviews when identities are known. EICS does not discourage non-archival publication of work prior to or during the review process but recognizes that complete anonymization becomes more difficult in that context.