[DMANET] SoCG 2027 Second Call for Papers

Dear colleagues, The submission server at https://socg27.hotcrp.com/ is open. Below is the second call for papers. Kind regards, Danny, Esther, and Steve. Call for papers SoCG 2027 Part of CG Week: Mon June 21 – Fri June 25 Registration deadline: Wednesday Nov 25, 2026, 23:29 AoE (Anywhere on Earth). Submission deadline: Wednesday Dec 2, 2026, 23:59 AoE Author notification: February 5, 2027 Final versions of accepted papers due: March 29 2027 We invite high quality submissions that describe original research on the theory and practice of computational problems in a geometric and/or topological setting. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: · Design, analysis, and implementation of geometric algorithms and data structures; · Computational complexity of geometric problems; · Implementation and experimental evaluation of geometric algorithms and heuristics, including mathematical, numerical, and algebraic aspects; · Discrete and combinatorial geometry; · Computational topology, topological data analysis, and topological combinatorics; · Applications of computational geometry or topology in any field. Two Tracks: To help ensure that each contribution is evaluated according to its merits, the submission and review process is organized in two tracks: Track T (Theory) and Track P (Practice). A new policy for SoCG 2027: Given the recent evolution of AI tools and their growing role in academic research, SoCG 2027 is introducing new submission policies aimed at upholding research quality and enhancing scientific communication. This includes an AI policy and a submission limit of up to six papers for a co-author. 1. Code of Conduct SoCG is dedicated to providing an environment that is free from harassment, bullying, discrimination, and retaliation for all participants. CG Week including SoCG is organized as an event of the CG Society <https://computational-geometry.org/society/> since 2025. All members of the Society are bound by its Code of Conduct <https://computational-geometry.org/society/code-of-conduct/>. Only members of the Society can give a presentation and hence at least one author of each accepted paper must become a member of the Society. Society membership is free of cost and open to everyone with a connection to the Computational Geometry community. 2. Submission Guidelines When writing or evaluating a SoCG paper, it is important to keep in mind that there are different types of contributions, each with their own strengths. To ensure that each submission is evaluated on its own merits, authors and reviewers need to identify the main strengths of a submission. To help with this task, the authors are asked to provide some additional information about their paper in the submission system, as detailed below. 2.1 Tracks If the main contribution is about theoretical aspects of computational geometry or topology, the paper should be submitted to Track T (Theory). If the main contribution is about practical aspects of computational geometry or topology, the paper should be submitted to Track P (Practice). If a paper makes relevant contributions to both theory and practice of computational geometry or topology, this should be indicated as part of the submission. There will be five options: P, P(T), PT, T(P), T. For example, T(P) indicates that the main focus of the paper is theory and a minor focus is practice. There are no quotas for the number and ratio of papers accepted in each track. 2.2 Paper Types To further differentiate the different types of contributions, we distinguish four possible paper types. Reviewers should take into account these paper types together with their associated evaluation criteria when they evaluate a paper. A submission can be labeled with several paper types, and there are no quotas for the number and ratio of papers accepted of each paper type. Mathematical Foundations: A typical paper contains theorems and proofs describing new results in discrete or combinatorial geometry, discrete differential geometry or topology, or in topological combinatorics. The paper will primarily be evaluated on the connection of the problem studied to computational geometry and topology, the importance of the results, the technical depth, the elegance of the solution, and the potential future impact on algorithm development. Algorithmic Complexity: A typical paper contains algorithms, data structures, theorems, proofs, or lower bound constructions describing new results on computational geometry or topology problems. The paper will primarily be evaluated on the relevance and importance of the problem studied, its technical depth, the elegance of the solution, and the potential future impact of the results or the proposed new methods and techniques. Implementation & Engineering: A typical paper addresses practical aspects of solving computational geometry and/or topology problems, such as algorithm implementation and engineering, constants vs. asymptotics, exact, approximate, or algebraic computation, robustness, or heuristics. The paper will primarily be evaluated on the (theoretical and practical) relevance and importance of the problem, the clarity and completeness of the exposition, the quality and expected impact of the results, the simplicity and elegance of the solution, and the completeness and soundness of the validation. Experimentation: A typical paper contains experimental evaluations of data related to computational geometry and/or topology problems (potentially arising from external fields), such as a comparison of competing algorithmic approaches, the design and generation of benchmark data, or cognitive studies on user interaction. The paper will primarily be evaluated on the relevance and importance of the problem, the clarity of the hypotheses, the soundness and completeness of the experiments and evaluation, and the expected impact of the results. 2.3 Interdisciplinary Research We are excited to discover connections between computational geometry and topology and other fields and embrace submissions that explore such connections. Connections can go both ways, for instance, using tools or inspiration from another field to obtain results in computational geometry or using tools from computational topology to obtain results in another field or application domain. In such a case, the novelty, relevance, and impact of the connection on both sides will be considered as part of the evaluation. Evaluating these aspects for the other domain can be challenging, as it is likely that there are no domain experts on the PC. Thus, the authors should explain the connection between computational geometry and/or topology and the other domain in sufficient detail and clarity within the paper, including any relevant terminology and modeling aspects. It then falls upon the reviewers to make a serious attempt to evaluate these aspects, including—wherever possible—to obtain input from domain experts. 2.4 New! Submission Limit Each co-author may appear in at most six submissions to SoCG 2027. Failure to adhere to these guidelines may result in desk rejection. 2.5 New! Quality of exposition At the discretion of the PC, submissions of papers with poor exposition may potentially be rejected without going through a full review cycle. 3. Double Blind and PC Submissions SoCG will employ a lightweight double-blind reviewing process, and will allow PC members (other than the PC chairs) to submit to the conference. Submissions should not reveal the identity of the authors in any way. In particular, authors' names, affiliations, funding information, and email addresses should not appear in the submission. Authors should ensure that any references to their own related work is in the third person (e.g., not “We build on our previous work ...”; but rather “We build on the work of ...”). Particular care needs to be taken if there is any accompanying software or data, which needs to be linked anonymously (for example, via a DropBox anonymous folder or Anonymous GitHub <https://anonymous.4open.science/>, perhaps with synthetic data if the real data is not anonymized). Upon registering a submission, the authors will declare conflicts of interest with PC members, as well as listing email address or domain level conflicts (e.g. “Dan Halperin (Tel-Aviv University)”, “All (University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign)”) of other professional or personal conflicts. This includes past advisors and students, people with the same affiliation, and any recent/frequent coauthors and collaborators. Please refer to Section 1 of the Reviewing Guidelines <https://people.inf.ethz.ch/hoffmann/Reviewing_Guidelines_SoCG_2026.pdf> for a detailed discussion of possible conflicts of interest. The purpose of lightweight double-blind reviewing is to help PC members and external reviewers come to an initial judgment about the paper without bias, not to make it impossible for them to discover the authors if they were to try. Authors should feel free to disseminate their ideas or draft versions of their paper as they normally would. For example, authors may post drafts of their papers on the web, upload them to an established open repository, such as arXiv or HAL, and give talks on their research ideas. We encourage authors with further questions on double-blind reviewing to contact the PC chairs, or to see the more detailed discussion in the proposal <https://computational-geometry.org/documents/Double_blind_proposal.pdf> that preceded the vote to move to double blind. 4. AI policy 1. Human authorship and responsibility: All listed authors must be human and are fully responsible for the integrity, accuracy, originality, and copyright of the submission. The PC chairs reserve the right to conduct personal interviews with the authors of a submission when they deem it necessary. 2. AI methodology: Authors who use AI tools to generate, derive, or substantially construct any major technical contribution of their paper must explicitly disclose this information in a dedicated section of the manuscript placed at the end of the paper (just below the references) and titled “AI Statement". In addition, this information needs to be disclosed in the submission form. The statement should appear in the final version of accepted papers so that readers will be informed. It will be used by the PC only for statistical purposes, not to assess the quality of the submissions. Routine AI assistance, such as standard code completion, proofreading, or grammar editing, does not require disclosure. 3. Retraction policy: The PC follows ACM's retraction policy. In the event of content-integrity issues identified before or during the conference, the PC reserves the right to reject a submission in its entirety or, if it has already been published in the conference proceedings, to retract it. 4. Use of LLMs in reviewing and evaluating papers: PC members and sub-reviewers may use LLMs to assist in reviewing and evaluating submitted papers, while taking care to ensure the confidentiality of the submission. Authors are required to explicitly consent to this use as part of the submission process. Reviewers remain responsible for their reviews, and all decisions about papers will be made by humans. A detailed guideline will be provided to reviewers regarding a careful usage of LLMs, in particular, respecting confidentiality standards to the best of their ability. We encourage authors who are concerned with potential breaches of confidentiality through LLM queries to make their work public at the time of the submission, by uploading them to an established open repository, such as arXiv or HAL. PC members and sub-reviewers must disclose all AI usage in preparing the review. Reviewers shall disclose which aspects of their review were supported by AI, confirm that the applicable AI guidelines were followed, and confirm that the AI outputs were verified by the reviewer. 5. Format Submissions must be formatted in accordance with the LIPIcs proceedings guidelines <https://www.dagstuhl.de/en/publishing/series/details/lipics#author>. Authors are required to use the LaTeX class file socg-lipics-v2021.cls (V0.9, Sep 19, 2022) <https://computational-geometry.org/documents/socg-lipics-v2021.cls>, with the option “anonymous”; note that the class file is a wrapper around the standard LIPIcs class. The LIPIcs style and instructions are available here <https://www.dagstuhl.de/en/publishing/series/details/lipics#author>; the SoCG class file is available here <https://computational-geometry.org/documents/socg-lipics-v2021.cls>, and instructions on how to use it are available here <https://computational-geometry.org/documents/linecount_2022_09_19.pdf>. Submissions must not exceed 500 lines, excluding front matter (title), references, and a clearly marked appendix (further described below), but including all other lines (in abstract, algorithms, tables, captions, etc.). The class files provide line counting which should be accurate in most cases. Authors should refrain from putting excessive amounts of text in parts in which lines are not counted automatically. If authors need constructs that contain uncounted lines of text, they should compensate for this by reducing the final line count accordingly. It is the sole responsibility of the authors not to exceed 500 lines even if some lines are not counted automatically. Contents of the submission. Papers should be submitted in the form of an extended abstract, which begins with the title of the paper, as well as a short abstract. This should be followed by the main body of the paper that begins with a precise statement of the problem considered, a succinct summary of the results obtained (emphasizing the significance, novelty, and potential impact of the research), and a clear comparison with related work. The problem should be clearly motivated, for instance, by curiosity, previous work, or applications. The remainder of the extended abstract should provide sufficient details to allow the program committee to evaluate the validity, quality, and relevance of the contribution. Clarity of presentation is very important; the entire extended abstract should be written carefully, taking into consideration that it will be read and evaluated by both experts and non-experts, often under tight time constraints. In addition, authors are asked to avoid “et al.” in citations in favor of an equal mention of all authors' surnames. For instance, if the number of authors is large, consider writing “The authors in [#] show” instead of “A et al. [#] show”. Appendix and supplemental data. All results must be reproducible, that is, all details needed to verify the results must be provided. For a theorem, there must be a complete proof that a reviewer could verify. For an implementation, there must be a package with the full source code and test data or generators that a reviewer could build and run to reproduce the results. For an experiment, the setup, execution, and evaluation must be described in sufficient detail to allow a reviewer to replicate it. Even though the limited timeframe for reviewing may not allow to fully review all details, it is upon the authors to make time the only limiting factor. Supporting material, such as proofs of theoretical claims, source code of implementations, and experimental details, that do not fit in the 500-line limit should be provided in an appendix or as supplemental data. The authors should include in the main part specific pointers to the relevant locations in the appendix or to the supplemental data. Additional material will be published, but not as part of the proceedings. Thus, the paper without the appendix and supplemental data should stand on its own. Previous or simultaneous submissions. Results previously published or accepted for publication in the proceedings of another conference cannot be submitted. Simultaneous submissions of the results to another conference with published proceedings are not allowed. Exempted are workshops and conferences without formal proceedings, but possibly with handouts containing short abstracts. In particular, submissions of papers that have appeared or will be submitted to EuroCG are allowed, since EuroCG does not publish formal proceedings, while submissions of papers that have appeared in CCCG are not allowed. Results that have already been accepted (with or without revision) for publication in a journal at the time of their submission to the symposium are not allowed. A paper submitted to a journal but not yet accepted for publication can be submitted to the symposium. In such cases, the authors will be asked to identify the status of the journal submission as part of their SoCG paper submission. Strict guidelines. Submissions deviating from the above guidelines risk being rejected without further consideration. Guidelines for reviewers. The guidelines for reviewers are available here <https://people.inf.ethz.ch/hoffmann/Reviewing_Guidelines_SoCG_2026.pdf>. 6. Accepted Papers Format. Final proceedings versions of accepted papers must respect the same formatting constraints as the submissions (LIPIcs proceedings format <https://submission.dagstuhl.de/series/details/5#author> with socg-lipics-v2021 <https://computational-geometry.org/documents/socg-lipics-v2021.cls>; 500-line limit, excluding front matter and references), but must not comprise any appendix. All results must be reproducible. If any supporting material (including complete proofs of theoretical claims, source code and test data of implementations, and/or experimental details and data) does not fit in the specified limit, then it must be made persistently publicly available elsewhere and referenced in the conference version. For instance, a full version of the paper can be published on the arXiv <https://arxiv.org/> or HAL <https://hal.science/?lang=en>, or supplemental data can be published in an organization's data archive, on Zenodo <https://zenodo.org/>, or on the Software Heritage Archive <https://www.softwareheritage.org/>, with a persistent DOI. An author's webpage or a GitHub repository are not considered persistent storage facilities. Presentation. At least one author of each accepted paper is expected to attend the symposium (either in person or online) and present the paper (approximately 20 minutes). Every presenting author must be a member of the CG Society. Awards: · Best paper award: An accepted paper may be selected as the best paper. All papers are eligible. · Best student paper award: An accepted paper may be selected as the best student paper. A paper is eligible if all authors are students at the time of submission. This must be indicated in the submission process. There is a box provided for this purpose on the submission server. · Best student presentation award: Based on the feedback from the audience, a presentation during the symposium by a student may be selected as the best student presentation. For more details, check the guidelines <https://computational-geometry.org/old/Awards/SoCG_Best_Student_Presentation_Award.pdf> . · Outstanding reviewer award: An external reviewer may be selected to receive an “Outstanding Reviewer Award”. In exceptional cases, each of these awards may be granted to more than one paper/presentation/reviewer. See here <https://computational-geometry.org/cg-week/awards/> for award recipients of previous years. Invited papers and special issues. Authors of the best paper may be invited to submit an extended version of their paper to the Journal of the ACM <https://dl.acm.org/journal/jacm>, and authors of one (or more) highly ranked papers may be invited to submit their full paper to the journal TheoretiCS <https://theoretics.episciences.org/>. Authors of a selection of accepted papers from the symposium will be invited to submit extended versions of their papers to special issues of Discrete & Computational Geometry <https://www.springer.com/journal/454> and Journal of Computational Geometry <https://jocg.org/>. 7. Program CommitteeTrack P - Thomas Bläsius (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology) - Jacobus Conradi (University of Copenhagen) - Guilherme Dias da Fonseca (Aix-Marseille University, LIS Laboratory) - Joachim Gudmundsson (University of Sydney) - Dan Halperin (co-chair) (Tel Aviv University) - Michael Kerber (Graz University of Technology) - David Loiseaux (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) - Joseph S. B. Mitchell (Stony Brook University) - Guillaume Moroz (INRIA Nancy-Grand Est) - Wouter Meulemans (TU Eindhoven) - Bastian Rieck (University of Fribourg) - Radmila Sazdanovic (NC State University) - Bei Wang Phillips (University of Utah) Track T - Henry Adams (University of Florida) - Angel Javier Alonso (CUNEF Universidad) - Shinwoo An (Bar-Ilan University) - Ulrich Bauer (Technical University of Munich) - Robin Belton (Vassar College) - Prosenjit Bose (Carleton University) - Magnus Botnan (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) - Benjamin Burton (University of Queensland) - Erin Chambers (University of Notre Dame) - Timothy Chan (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) - Arnaud de Mesmay (CNRS/ Gustave Eiffel University) - Tamal Dey (Purdue University) - Esther Ezra (co-chair) (Bar-Ilan University) - Sándor Fekete (Technische Universität Braunschweig) - Omrit Filtser (Open University) - Arijit Ghosh (Indian Statistical Institute) - Barbara Giunti (State University of New York) - Chaya Keller (Ariel University) - Linda Kleist (Universität Hamburg) - Andrey Kupavskii (Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology) - Sushovan Majhi (George Washington University) - David Mount (University of Maryland) - Nabil H. Mustafa (Sorbonne Paris North University) - Gabriel Nivasch (Ariel University) - Steve Oudot (co-chair) (Inria and Institut Polytechnique de Paris <https://dblp.org/search/inst?q=Inria+and+Institut+Polytechnique+de+Paris> ) - Siddharth Pritam (Chennai Mathematical Institute) - Orit Raz (Ben-Gurion University) - Carolin Rehs (University of Düsseldorf) - Christian Rieck (University of Kassel) - Günter Rote (Freie Universität Berlin) - André Schulz (University of Hagen) - Martin Tancer (Charles University) - Ivor van der Hoog (IT University of Copenhagen) - Marc van Kreveld (Utrecht University) - Lukas Waas (Oxford University) - Uli Wagner (Institute of Science and Technology Austria) - Andreas Wiese (Technical University of Munich) - Da Wei Zheng (Institute of Science and Technology Austria) ********************************************************** * * Contributions to be spread via DMANET are submitted to * * DMANET@zpr.uni-koeln.de * * Replies to a message carried on DMANET should NOT be * addressed to DMANET but to the original sender. The * original sender, however, is invited to prepare an * update of the replies received and to communicate it * via DMANET. * * DISCRETE MATHEMATICS AND ALGORITHMS NETWORK (DMANET) * http://www.zaik.uni-koeln.de/AFS/publications/dmanet/ * **********************************************************