SIGMOD-PODS 2027 Logo
ACM SIGMOD LOGO
ACM SIGMOD/PODS International Conference on Management of Data   •   June 13-19, 2027   •   Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Calls For Submissions





SIGMOD 2027 CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPERS

The PACMMOD issues of SIGMOD 2027 seek contributions in all aspects of data management research. Authors of papers published in the PACMMOD issues of SIGMOD 2027 will be invited to present their work at the SIGMOD conference, June 13-June 19, 2027. The annual ACM SIGMOD conference is a leading international forum for data management researchers, practitioners, developers, and users to explore cutting-edge ideas and results, and to exchange techniques, tools, and experiences.

Highlights of 2027:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  1. Topics of Interest & Paper Types
  2. Important Dates
  3. Presentation and Dissemination
  4. Submission Guidelines
  5. Anonymity Requirements
  6. Artifacts and Reproducibility
  7. Conflict of Interest (COI)
  8. Reviewing Process and Revisions
  9. Desk Rejection Policy

1. TOPICS OF INTEREST & PAPER TYPES

We invite submissions relating to all aspects of the data life cycle.

TOPICS OF INTEREST

Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

Data Management Systems

Data Models and Languages

Human-Centric Data Management

Data Governance, Quality, and Fairness

Modern AI & Data Management

Other topics which are not listed but clearly address data management related challenges are also welcome. SIGMOD also welcomes submissions on inter-disciplinary work, as long as there are clear contributions to management of data.

PAPER TYPES

The conference invites the submission of (1) Regular Research Papers, (2) Experiment & Analysis (E&A) Studies, and (3) Papers on Data-Intensive & Data Science (DI&DS) Applications that focus on data management challenges relevant to one of the topics in the call for papers. All papers are reviewed by the same SIGMOD program committee.

2. IMPORTANT DATES

There are 4 submission rounds (January, April, July, and October). Authors of submissions with a revision decision will be given approximately one month to submit a revised version. While we strive to adhere to the published timeline, we note that author feedback and notification dates may vary slightly. Submission deadlines are not expected to be altered.

To ensure consistent submission deadlines across different editions of SIGMOD–thereby avoiding confusion and allowing better workload management for the Program Committee–we recognize that deadlines may occasionally coincide with holidays in certain regions or with weekends. However, since holidays and workdays vary across countries and cultures, we encourage authors to plan accordingly and consider submitting a few days early if a deadline overlaps with a local holiday or weekend.

RESEARCH PAPER SUBMISSION ROUND 1 (All Deadlines are 11:59 PM AoE)
January 10, 2026: Abstract submission & declaration of COIs
January 17, 2026: Paper submission
March 10-17, 2026: Author feedback phase
April 19, 2026: Notification of accept/reject/revision
May 19, 2026: Revised paper submission
June 12, 2026: Final notification of accept/reject

RESEARCH PAPER SUBMISSION ROUND 2 (All Deadlines are 11:59 PM AoE)
April 10, 2026 : Abstract submission & declaration of COIs
April 17, 2026: Paper submission
June 10-17, 2026: Author feedback phase
July 19, 2026: Notification of accept/reject/revision
August 19, 2026: Revised paper submission
September 12, 2026: Final notification of accept/reject

RESEARCH PAPER SUBMISSION ROUND 3 (All Deadlines are 11:59 PM AoE)
July 10, 2026: Abstract submission & declaration of COIs
July 17, 2026: Paper submission
September 10-17, 2026: Author feedback phase
October 19, 2026: Notification of accept/reject/revision
November 19, 2026: Revised paper submission
December 12, 2026: Final notification of accept/reject

RESEARCH PAPER SUBMISSION ROUND 4 (All Deadlines are 11:59 PM AoE)
October 10, 2026: Abstract submission & declaration of COIs
October 17, 2026: Paper submission
December 10-17, 2026: Author feedback phase
January 19, 2027: Notification of accept/reject/revision
February 19, 2027: Revised paper submission
March 12, 2027: Final notification of accept/reject

3. PRESENTATION AND DISSEMINATION

Accepted papers will be published in issues of the Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data (PACMMOD) (https://dl.acm.org/journal/pacmmod), with one issue corresponding to each submission deadline, and invited for presentation at the SIGMOD conference.

All papers will be given a presentation and a poster slot. The number of SIGMOD submissions has been growing steadily over many years resulting in more accepted papers while the duration of the conference is fixed. Based on the number of papers, all papers may have a shortened presentation time. We may also restructure the program format in a new way to accommodate this. More details of the presentation format will be updated later in the process.

4. SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

Submission Link https://cmt3.research.microsoft.com/SIGMOD2027
Submission Paper length 12 pages excluding references
References Unlimited
Appendix Yes, as a separate pdf, but only to include essential details. Note that the paper must be self-contained, and the reviewers are not required to read the appendix. The appendix is only used during review and is not part of the camera-ready version of accepted papers. The appendix should be short and used judiciously by authors to include the essential details that may be useful in the review process (e.g., additional proofs). A longer appendix with additional results and material that cannot be sufficiently discussed in the main paper is discouraged and will definitively be ignored in the review process.
File type and size PDF (<= 10 MB)
Paper size Letter (8.5” x 11”)
Format
  • LaTeX
  • Word
  • Overleaf
2-column ACM Proceedings format:
Anonymity Double-anonymity (see below)
Camera Ready Paper length 13 pages excluding references (for all accepted papers), no appendix, in 2-column ACM format, converted to the PACMMOD format

AUTHORSHIP

We limit the number of submissions per author to a maximum of 10. If more than 10 papers are submitted with the same person listed as an author, the additional papers submitted after the initial 10, will be rejected without review (see the Desk Rejection Policy). Revision submissions are not counted.

Additional information:

DUPLICATE SUBMISSIONS AND NOVELTY REQUIREMENT

Following the ACM guidelines a paper submitted to SIGMOD 2027 cannot be under review for any other publishing forum or presentation venue, including conferences, workshops, and journals, during the time it is being considered for SIGMOD. Furthermore, after you submit a paper to SIGMOD, you must await the response from SIGMOD and only re-submit elsewhere if your paper is rejected—or withdrawn at your request—from SIGMOD. This restriction applies not only to identical papers but also to papers with a substantial overlap in scientific content and results.

To enforce this requirement, the high-level metadata of submissions (title, abstract, list of authors), may be shared with the Program Chairs / Editors of other conferences and journals.

Every paper submitted to SIGMOD 2027 must present substantial novelty and include material not described in any prior publication. In this context, a prior publication is (a) a paper of five pages or more, presented, or accepted for presentation, at a refereed conference or workshop with proceedings; or (b) an article published, or accepted for publication, in a refereed journal. If a SIGMOD 2027 submission has overlap with a prior publication, the submission must cite the prior publication (respecting the double anonymity requirement) and clearly indicate which parts of the work appeared in prior publications and which parts are novel to the current submission.

Any violation of this policy will result in the immediate rejection of the submission, as well as in notification to the members of the SIGMOD Executive Committee, the members of the SIGMOD PC, and the editors or chairs of any other forums involved.

ACM PUBLICATIONS POLICY ON RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN PARTICIPANTS AND SUBJECTS

As a published ACM author, you and your co-authors are subject to all ACM Publications Policies, including ACM's new Publications Policy on Research Involving Human Participants and Subjects.

INCLUSION AND DIVERSITY IN WRITING

We value Diversity and Inclusion in our community and professions. Both are important in our writing as well. Diversity of representation in writing is a simple but visible avenue to celebrate and ultimately help improve our community's diversity. Be mindful in your writing of not using language or examples that further the marginalization, stereotyping, or erasure of any group of people, especially historically marginalized and/or under-represented groups (URGs) in computing. Be vigilant and guard against unintentionally exclusionary examples.

Please visit this page for many examples of both exclusionary writing to avoid and inclusive writing that celebrates diversity to consider adopting: https://dbdni.github.io/pages/inclusivewriting.html. Authors are further encouraged to follow the tips and guidelines provided at: https://dbdni.github.io/#materials. Reviewers will be empowered to monitor and demand changes if such issues arise. Going further, also consider actively raising the representation of URGs in writing.

Please see https://www.acm.org/diversity-inclusion/words-matter for inclusive alternatives for some of the terms commonly used in the computing profession.

POLICY ON AUTHORSHIP REQUIREMENTS

We follow the ACM policy on authorship requirements. All submissions must comply with the ACM policy on the use of Artificial Intelligence Specifically on the use of generative AI tools and technologies, the guidelines note that: "Generative AI tools and technologies, such as ChatGPT, may not be listed as authors of an ACM published Work. The use of generative AI tools and technologies to create content is permitted but must be fully disclosed in the Work. For example, the authors could include the following statement in the Acknowledgements section of the Work: ChatGPT was utilized to generate sections of this Work, including text, tables, graphs, code, data, citations, etc.). If you are uncertain about the need to disclose the use of a particular tool, err on the side of caution, and include a disclosure in the acknowledgements section of the Work."

OPEN ACCESS MODEL OF ACM

Starting January 1, 2026, ACM will fully transition to Open Access. All ACM publications, including those from ACM-sponsored conferences, will be 100% Open Access. Authors will have two primary options for publishing Open Access articles with ACM: the ACM Open institutional model or by paying Article Processing Charges (APCs). With over 2,700+ institutions already part of ACM Open and with more institutions joining from around the world every week, the majority of ACM-sponsored conference papers will not require APCs from authors or conferences (currently, around 75% on average across all ACM-sponsored conferences).

Authors from institutions not participating in ACM Open will need to pay an APC to publish their papers, unless they qualify for a geographic or discretionary financial hardship waiver. To find out whether an APC applies to your article, please consult the list of participating institutions in ACM Open and review the Policy on Geographic APC Waivers and Discounts Policy and the Policy on Discretionary APC Waivers Keep in mind that discretionary waivers are rare and are granted based on specific criteria set by ACM. Simply sending a message to ACM indicating an inability to pay an APC is typically an insufficient justification for such a waiver. Waivers are based on the specific circumstances of the author(s) requesting the waiver. ACM does take seriously into consideration the institutional affiliation of the authors and whether it is a reasonable expectation that their institution should be joining the ACM Open program. This is necessary for the long-term financial sustainability of the ACM Open model.

To support a smooth transition and encourage broader ACM Open participation, ACM has approved a temporary subsidy on APC pricing for 2026. The subsidy will offer (subject to change):

Authors No ACM or SIG members At least 1 ACM or SIG member
ACM and SIG Sponsored Conference Article $350 $250
From a lower-middle-income country $175 $125

This represents a 65% discount off the regular APC list prices (subject to change), funded directly by ACM. Authors are encouraged to help advocate for their institutions to join ACM Open during this transition period. This temporary subsidized pricing will apply to all conferences scheduled for 2026.

PROCEDURE FOR WITHDRAWAL OF SUBMISSIONS

Authors may withdraw their submissions within one week following the submission deadline without any penalty. After this period, withdrawals will incur a penalty (see Desk Rejection Policy).

To request a withdrawal, authors must email the PC chairs, copying all co-authors in the message, and explicitly stating that all authors consent to the withdrawal.

5. ANONYMITY REQUIREMENTS

Research track submissions are subject to the double-anonymity requirement.

Every research track paper submitted to SIGMOD 2027 will undergo a double-anonymous reviewing process, following the three principles put forward in ( Snodgrass 2007): authors should not be required to go to great lengths to anonymize their submissions; comprehensiveness of the review trumps anonymizing efficacy. AEs retain flexibility and authority in managing the reviewing process.

PC members and referees, except the Associate Editors, who review the submission will not know the identity of the authors. To ensure anonymity of authorship from the PC members and referees, authors must at least do the following:

To avoid compromising the double-anonymity requirement, we request that authors refrain from publicizing or uploading versions of their submitted manuscripts to pre-publication servers, such as arXiv, or to other online forums during the reviewing period. If a version of the submission is already available on a pre-publication server, such as arXiv, authors do not need to remove it before submitting to SIGMOD.

You must also use care in referring to related past work, particularly your own, in the paper. For example, if you are Jane Smith, the following text gives away the authorship of the submitted paper:

In our previous work [1, 2], we presented two algorithms for ... In this paper, we build on that work by ...
Bibliography
[1] Jane Smith, "A Simple Algorithm for ...," Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD 1997, pp. 1 - 10.
[2] Jane Smith, "A More Complicated Algorithm for ...," Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD 1998, pp. 34 - 44.

The solution is to reference one's past work in the third person. This allows setting the context for your submission while at the same time preserving anonymity:

In previous work [1, 2], algorithms were presented for ... In this paper, we build on that work by ...
Bibliography
[1] Jane Smith, "A Simple Algorithm for ...," Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD 1997, pp. 1 - 10.
[2] Jane Smith, "A More Complicated Algorithm for ...," Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD 1998, pp. 34 - 44.

Despite the anonymity requirements, authors should still include all relevant work of their own in the references, using the above style; omitting them could potentially reveal their identity by negation. However, self-references should be limited to the essential ones, and extended versions of the submitted paper (e.g., technical reports or URLs for downloadable versions) must not be referenced.

Common sense and careful writing can go a long way toward preserving anonymity without diminishing the quality or impact of a paper. The goal is to preserve anonymity while still allowing the reader to fully grasp the context (related past work, including your own) of the submitted paper. In past years, this goal has been achieved successfully by thousands of papers.

It is the responsibility of authors to do their very best to preserve anonymity. No exceptions will be made to the double anonymity requirement for Research Track papers. If the authors of a submission feel that double anonymity needs to be violated, for example to reveal the identity of a system, they may consider submission to a SIGMOD track that does not impose a double anonymity requirement, such as the Industry Track.

6. ARTIFACTS and REPRODUCIBILITY

SIGMOD strives to establish a culture where sharing research artifacts (data, results, code, and scripts) is the norm rather than an exception. SIGMOD reproducibility has three goals: (a) Highlighting the impact of database research papers; (b) enabling easy dissemination of research results; and (c) enabling easy sharing of code and experimentation set-ups. In this context, we expect all papers to make their code, data, scripts, and notebooks available. Although it is not mandatory for acceptance, providing this extra material can help reviewers evaluate your work more thoroughly. Papers published at SIGMOD which have been successfully reproduced are also recognized and highlighted as such in the ACM Digital Library.

Please include a link with your materials in the text box provided in the submission form at the time of submission. For all submissions, the link and materials should preserve anonymity. For example this may be an anonymous GitHub repository. You may want to make sure that the link you provide is not indexed by search engines. On GitHub, you can do so by adding the following to the page head: 

<meta name="robots" content="noindex">

We recognize that at the time of submission authors focus on fine-tuning the paper, but the link must be added by the paper deadline. Reviewers that may need to look at the materials will not do so earlier than that. We do not expect a fully polished submission in terms of automatically reproducing results, but rather a reasonably clean version of the state of the code when submitting the paper. Please, do not use a shortened link which traces who accesses it.

In the event that you are not able to submit your code, data, scripts, and notebooks, please explain in the text box provided in the submission form why this is the case.

7. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (COI)

DECLARING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

It is the full responsibility of all authors of a paper to identify all and only their potential conflict-of-interest PC members. It is the full responsibility of all authors of a paper to identify all and only their potential conflict-of-interest PC members.

DEFINITION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (COI)

X and Y have a conflict of interest (COI) if any of the following applies:

To identify any potentially spurious conflicts, PC members may be asked to confirm declared conflicts with submitting authors.

GUIDELINES ON DECLARING COI IN CMT

8. REVIEWING PROCESS, INTERACTIVE DISCUSSIONS, AND REVISIONS

Number of reviews: Each submission will first receive at least three reviews. At the discretion of the AE and the PC chairs, additional reviews may be procured.

Author feedback phase: There is an author feedback phase before decisions are made. Authors will have a few days to read the initial reviews and submit feedback. The feedback (limited length) has two purposes:

  1. Propose a revision plan: Based on the reviews, authors can propose a revision plan on how they aim to address the feedback of the reviews in a potential revision. The revision plan will be input to the reviewer discussion to make their decision (accept, revision, reject). In case a paper is selected for a revision, the revision plan will be the basis for the revision. However, reviewers and AEs can still ask for additional requests or changes to the revision plan.
  2. Clarify misunderstandings: The second purpose of the author feedback is to clarify misunderstandings and factual errors through pointers to specific text in the submitted paper. As an example, a reviewer may have overlooked a part of the discussion in the paper and state that the paper fails to compare with a certain method; an example feedback will be of the form "We compare to the method suggested by reviewer #3 in Section 2.4, paragraph 3".

Interactive discussion: After the author feedback phase, the reviewers may reach out to authors for additional clarifications on the paper or the proposed revision plan. This is initiated by reviewers, and it is up to them to decide whether they should reach out to the authors for further clarifications.

Decisions: After the discussions of the reviewers and AEs, each paper will be notified of a decision from Accept / Reject / Minor Revision / Major Revision.

Revisions: Some papers will be invited to submit a revised version (minor or major). Authors will have one month to implement the revision items. The revision process is intended to be a constructive partnership between reviewers and authors. To this end, reviewers will be instructed to request revisions only in constructive scenarios with specific requests. The basis for the revision is the revision plan and the additional feedback/requests that reviewers or AEs provided. In turn, authors bear the responsibility of attempting to meet those requests within the stated time frame, or of withdrawing the paper from submission. The revised papers will be reviewed again by the reviewers, and an acceptance after the revision is not guaranteed.

For the revision, one extra content page is allowed after the first review to accommodate the requested revision items. The revised submission should include a revision letter (up to 4 pages) to summarize how the authors have addressed the requested revisions. For papers that go through major or minor revisions, the changed text must be highlighted in different colors for different reviewers, and section/page numbers must be referred to (along with line numbers when possible) in the revision letter, to ease their identification by the reviewers. The extra page is also available for the final version to the papers that are directly accepted.

9. DESK REJECTION POLICY

Submissions to the SIGMOD 2027 Research Track that fail to meet the following requirements will be rejected, possibly without review (desk rejection). This policy is adapted from those used by recent editions of major data management conferences.

1. Formatting or double-anonymity violations: Submissions must be double-anonymous and adhere to the guidelines and length requirements outlined in the SIGMOD 2027 Call for Papers. Any deviation from the prescribed format will result in a desk rejection. Note that figures, tables, proofs, appendixes, acknowledgements, or any other content (excluding references) after page 12 of the submission is considered a format violation. If the double-anonymity violation is detected early before reviewing starts (e.g., if Associate Editors spot early that authors’ names are included in the title of the submission), the authors are permitted to resubmit in subsequent rounds. However, if the violation appears within the main text of the submission, associated external codebase (e.g., github), or appendix and can only be discovered during the review process, the submission will be classified as a rejection, and the one-year embargo will apply (see below).

2. Unregistered authors, missing ORCID IDs: Each author is required to have both a registered CMT account for SIGMOD 2027 and an ORCID ID. Submissions with authors who lack a CMT registration or an ORCID ID will be desk rejected.

3. COI violations: Authors must correctly declare all conflicts of interest (COI) with the Program Committee (PC chairs, Associate Editors and PC members). All submissions will be checked for validity or omission of COIs via automated software. Both, failing to report COIs and frivolously defining COIs, count as a violation of this requirement. It is the full responsibility of all authors of a paper to identify and declare all COIs with the Program Committee prior to the abstract deadline mentioned in the Call for Papers. Submissions with undeclared conflicts or spurious conflicts will be desk-rejected. If COI violations are discovered after notifications have been sent, any affected submissions will be rejected, even if they were previously accepted or under revision. Egregious violation of COI policy as determined by the PC chairs and the Submission and Review Ethics Committee (SREC) will be treated as unethical behavior (see 7).

4. Relevance mismatch (out-of-scope): Submissions must be in scope of SIGMOD 2027. Specifically, this means that a submission must align with at least one of the above topic areas defined for SIGMOD 2027 and situate itself within the state-of-the-art of current and past research in the database community in general and within the selected topic(s) in particular.

Papers that are not directly relevant to the database community are subject to desk rejection, even if they provide a compelling solution to an otherwise interesting problem. Such papers should be submitted to a more appropriate venue. For example, submissions that purely advance data mining or machine learning approaches not related to data management aspects would be considered out of scope for SIGMOD.

Authors who believe their work may fall into this category should provide a justification (in 1000 characters) in the submission form why their work is relevant to the SIGMOD/database community, and highlight (a) the key data management challenges addressed in the paper and (b) principled ideas and contributions that this work brings to data management. These ideas and contributions should be linked to specific sections of the paper.

Examples: (a) "We propose a new ML technique that enables database systems to achieve X and we clearly demonstrate in the paper (theory, experiments) how the database systems achieve X though our new technique. In particular, in section Z we ..." (b) "We propose a new indexing scheme or modify the query optimizer or we propose a new storage layout to improve the performance of ML or DM model X, and we clearly demonstrate this in the paper. In particular, in section Z we ..." (c) "Although this work is not aligned with the core conference topics, we see that there was a work on the same problem published in a previous data management conference."

Explanations in the spirit of (a) and (b) will be in favor of the paper. Arguments like (c) are not sufficient excuses and are very likely to lead to a desk-reject due to out-of-scope submission.

5. Incremental submissions from a similar group of authors: SIGMOD 2027 strongly discourages submissions that constitute incremental extensions of prior work by the same/similar group of authors (large overlap between the authors of a pair of submissions). Specifically, if a group submits a paper in one review round and subsequently submits an incremental extension of that work in the same or a later round, the latter submission may be subject to desk rejection.

Authors who believe that their submission might be perceived as an incremental extension must provide a justification (limited to 1000 characters) in the submission form, clearly articulating why the present work represents a substantive contribution beyond any of their other submissions to SIGMOD 2027.

6. Submission cap per author: An author may submit a maximum of 10 papers to the research track across all submission rounds of SIGMOD 2027. All submissions by an author that exceed the cap (11th submission onwards) will be desk rejected.

7. Unethical behavior: At the discretion of the PC chairs and SREC, a submission may also be rejected due to unethical behavior. These submissions will be reported to the SREC. They may be penalized with the 12-month embargo (see below), as well as other sanctions as decided by SREC. The SREC may report these cases to the ACM and may lead to additional penalties from ACM. Examples include:

Re-submission policy: Submissions that are desk-rejected in a given round for reasons (1) to (3) and are not flagged for ethical violation may be resubmitted in a subsequent round. Submissions rejected for reasons (4) to (7) are not eligible for resubmission in later rounds.

1-year embargo: Authors are prohibited from resubmitting any work that was previously rejected from the research tracks within one year of the original submission date (next 3 rounds/cycles) even if the work has been revised substantially.

Authors are allowed to withdraw their submission one week after the submission deadline without incurring any penalty. Submissions withdrawn after that will be treated as rejections, and the 1-year resubmission embargo will apply to them as well.

In other words, a paper rejected from the research track cannot be resubmitted to the SIGMOD research track within 12 months of its rejection (next 3 cycles/rounds). Submissions violating the 1-year embargo policy will be rejected if detected at any point of the review cycle and cannot be submitted again in the subsequent rounds of SIGMOD 2027.

Responsibility: The responsibility rests with all the authors to ensure their paper meets all submission requirements.