Organization Handbook
Organization Handbook
Your practical guide to running CICC — from TPC responsibilities and paper review to member tracking and conference operations. Written for the people who make the conference work.
About CICC
The IEEE Custom Integrated Circuits Conference (CICC) is the premier venue for advances in custom integrated circuit design, hosted annually under the IEEE Solid-State Circuits Society (SSCS). It brings together practitioners from academia and industry to present novel IC designs and system innovations.
CICC is sponsored by SSCS and technically co-sponsored by CASS (the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society).
This handbook is your internal reference for how the conference is governed, how the Technical Program Committee (TPC) operates, and how decisions are made — from paper selection all the way to keynote planning. If you’re new to the committee, start here. If you’re returning, use it as a refresher or a reference when specific situations arise.
This handbook is for TPC Chairs, TPC Members, General Chairs, and IEEE/SSCS Administrators. Conference participants and authors have their own dedicated guide — see the For Participants link at the top right.
A Brief History
CICC was established in 1979 as a focused venue for custom IC design — at a time when the field was rapidly expanding beyond standard off-the-shelf components. Over four decades, it has grown into a globally recognized conference covering analog, digital, RF, power, biomedical, and emerging circuit domains.
The conference is held each spring, typically in April or May, rotating between North America venues. The current steering committee structure and double-blind review policy reflect reforms made to strengthen review integrity and widen geographic participation.
Annual Calendar
The CICC year runs on a roughly nine-month cycle from call-for-papers to final conference. Below is the typical sequence — specific dates shift each year and are confirmed by the TPC Chair and Program Specialist.
TPC Planning & Recruitment
TPC Chair and Vice-Chair confirm subcommittee rosters, recruit new members, and set review workload targets for the upcoming cycle — building on the Subcommittee Chair/Co-Chair leadership set up the previous April (see below).
Call for Papers Published
CFP goes live on ieee-cicc.org. Paper templates and submission portal (Ex Ordo) are opened. Invited speaker outreach begins in parallel.
Submission Deadline (Firm)
All regular technical session papers due. The deadline is not extended. TPC members receive paper assignments within one week of close.
Review Period
Each paper receives a minimum of five independent reviews. Subcommittee chairs monitor completion and follow up with reviewers who are behind.
TPC Meeting & Final Decisions
Subcommittee chairs present borderline cases. Final accept/reject decisions are made based on the scores TPC members submitted during review. Top papers are flagged for Best Paper consideration.
Author Notifications Sent
Accept/reject notices go to corresponding authors via Ex Ordo. Accepted authors begin camera-ready and registration processes.
Conference
Three-day technical program, Monday–Wednesday. TPC members are expected to participate the full week, including the Sunday before the technical program begins.
Next Cycle’s Subcommittee Leadership Set Up
Subcommittee Chairs and Co-Chairs for the next calendar year are set up before or during the April conference — this kicks off the following year’s cycle, ahead of the June–July recruitment step above.
Master Operating Timeline
This is the detailed, task-level operating plan behind the high-level calendar above. It is written as a repeatable annual template — timing is expressed relative to the conference cycle (e.g. “Early June,” “T‑minus 3 weeks”) rather than fixed calendar dates, so it can be reused and simply re-dated each year by the Steering Committee and Program Specialist. Owners are listed by role, not by name, so the template survives TPC turnover.
At the start of a new cycle, copy this table into a working tracker and convert each relative timing into that year’s actual dates, anchored off the target conference date and the firm paper-submission deadline. The “Notes” column captures dependencies and gotchas that tend to repeat year over year.
Phase 1 — TPC Renewal & Recruitment
| Task | Owner | Target Timing | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identify retiring TPC members & send thank-you emails | Steering Committee & IEEE | Early June | Use thank-you email template. |
| Current TPC confirms availability & acknowledges confidentiality agreement | IEEE Staff & TPC Members | Mid-June | Starting with the 2027 cycle, a Google Form is used to track invitation responses and confidentiality-agreement acknowledgment — paper signatures are no longer used. |
| Identify new TPC members | TPC Chair | Late June | |
| Send new TPC invitations | IEEE Staff | Late June | Use invitation template and track acceptance and confidentiality agreement using Google Form. |
| Finalize TPC roster | TPC Chair (with Subcommittee Chairs/Co-Chairs) | Early July | Confidentiality agreements should be received by this point. Add confirmed members to the conference website. |
| Subcommittee Chair/Co-Chair meeting | Subcommittee Chairs/Co-Chairs | Early July | Work with subcommittee members to come up with proposals on ED sessions, panels, forums, and invited speakers. |
| Technical committee (TPC1) meetings | All TPC Members | Late July | TPC Chair welcomes TPC members; Subcommittee Chairs summarize proposals with their committees in a breakout session. |
Phase 2 — Call for Papers
| Task | Owner | Target Timing | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Org Chairs evaluate proposals & present to Steering Committee | Org Chairs | Early August | |
| Finalize Call for Papers | Subcommittee Chairs/Co-Chairs | Mid-August | |
| Publish Call for Papers | IEEE | Mid-to-late August | Send to TPC members, post on conference website, request society-wide blast. |
| Paper submission opens | Authors | Late August | Send to TPC members, post on conference website, request society-wide blast. |
Phase 3 — Submission & Assignment
| Task | Owner | Target Timing | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finalize paper review format meeting | Steering Committee & IEEE | Early November | Should be finalized at least a month before the paper submission deadline. Subcommittee Co-Chairs should test the review website ahead of the review period starting. |
| TPC meeting (Chairs/Co-Chairs) | Subcommittee Chairs/Co-Chairs | Mid-November | Roughly one week before the submission deadline. |
| Paper submission deadline (no extensions) | Authors | Mid-November | Firm deadline. Note competing conference notification dates when setting the exact date (e.g. ISSCC notifications typically land a few weeks earlier). |
| Receive papers for reshuffling | Subcommittee Chairs/Co-Chairs | Day after submission deadline | Pre-review submissions and flag papers that should move to another subcommittee. |
| Reassignment of topics/papers | Subcommittee Chairs/Co-Chairs | 1 day after reshuffle review | |
| TPC meeting (All) | All TPC Members | ~1 week after submission deadline | |
| Review assignment sheets sent to review platform | IEEE → Review Platform | Same week as TPC meeting (All) | Merge all subcommittee assignments into one spreadsheet before handoff. Build in a short buffer, but don’t advertise the buffer date to subcommittee chairs. |
| Review platform imports assignments | Review Platform Administrator | ~2–3 business days after handoff |
Phase 4 — Review Period
| Task | Owner | Target Timing | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reviewing starts | All TPC Members | Late November | |
| Conference registration opens | IEEE | Mid-December | |
| Reviewing deadline | All TPC Members | Early January |
Phase 5 — Selection & Notification
| Task | Owner | Target Timing | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical Paper Selection Meeting (TPC2) | All TPC Members | Early-to-mid January (2 consecutive days) | The final day is typically run by subcommittee chairs in separate meetings, without IEEE staff. |
| Author notices sent | IEEE | Mid-January | |
| Program organization meeting | Steering Committee & IEEE, Subcommittee Chairs/Co-Chairs | Mid-January |
The Technical Paper Selection Meeting currently runs 2 days. Some subcommittees have felt rushed given the heavy review load — possibly too many papers for the time allotted — and there’s discussion of extending it to 3 days. This has not yet been decided by the Steering Committee; this handbook reflects the current 2-day format and should be updated if that changes.
Phase 6 — Presenter Preparation
| Task | Owner | Target Timing | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Presenter information email sent | IEEE | Early February | |
| IEEE copyright form due | Authors | Late February | |
| Presenter registration due | Authors | Early March | |
| Draft presentation slides due | Authors | Early-to-mid March | |
| Session Chair feedback on slides | Session Chairs | Mid-March | |
| Final presentation slides due | Authors | Late March |
Steering Committee
The Steering Committee provides strategic direction for CICC and is accountable to the IEEE Solid-State Circuits Society. It is chaired by the General Chair and includes the core leadership roles that govern the conference year-to-year.
General Chair
Overall accountability for the conference. Chairs the Steering Committee, manages IEEE/SSCS relationship, and handles escalations from both the TPC and Org committees.
Conference Chair
Day-to-day operational lead for the conference year. Coordinates between all committees, manages the Program Specialist, and oversees the venue and logistics.
Technical Program Chair
Owns the paper review process end-to-end. Appoints subcommittee chairs and co-chairs, sets review policy, chairs the TPC meeting, and signs off on accept/reject decisions.
Technical Program Vice-Chair
Supports the TPC Chair and leads specific subcommittees or process improvements. Typically succeeds to TPC Chair in the following year to ensure continuity.
Treasurer
Manages conference finances, sponsorship accounting, registration revenue, and IEEE financial reporting. Works closely with the Conference Chair and IEEE CEE.
SSCS Representative
Liaison to the IEEE Solid-State Circuits Society. Ensures CICC aligns with SSCS policies, communicates steering decisions back to the society, and advocates for CICC interests.
Past Chair / Strategic Development
Provides institutional memory and continuity. Advises on long-term strategy, manages relationships with industry sponsors, and mentors incoming leadership.
Technical Subcommittees
The TPC is organized into nine technical subcommittees, each covering a distinct domain of custom IC design. Every submitted paper is assigned to exactly one subcommittee for review.
Each subcommittee is led by a Chair and a Co-Chair, supported by typically 8–12 Members. The Chair is responsible for paper assignments within the subcommittee, leading discussion during the TPC meeting, and presenting borderline cases to the full committee.
Occasionally a paper spans two subcommittees. In these cases the TPC Chair, in consultation with both subcommittee chairs, determines the primary assignment. A co-reviewer from the secondary subcommittee may be added at the subcommittee chair’s discretion.
Organization Committees
Alongside the technical program, seven organization committees handle the broader conference experience. Many TPC members serve dual roles — one in a technical subcommittee and one in an org committee.
| Committee | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Best Paper & Awards | Coordinates nomination and judging for Best Paper, Outstanding Student Paper, and other SSCS/CICC awards. Works with TPC to identify top-paper candidates during review. |
| Educational Sessions | Plans and recruits speakers for tutorial sessions and educational workshops that run alongside the main technical program. |
| Forums | Organizes focused industry/academic forum sessions on emerging topics. Selects themes, recruits panelists, and manages forum logistics. |
| Mentorship & Social Events | Runs mentoring programs for students and early-career attendees, and coordinates networking events including the Welcome Reception and social dinners. |
| Outreach | Manages diversity and inclusion initiatives, student outreach, university liaison programs, and CICC’s presence at other IEEE events. |
| Panel Sessions | Curates and chairs panel discussions on industry trends. Responsible for panelist invitations, session format, and audience Q&A management. |
| Sponsorship | Manages corporate patron relationships, prospectus preparation, and sponsor deliverables including exhibition space, program advertisements, and acknowledgments. |
Roles & Duties
Being on the CICC TPC is a meaningful commitment. Here’s a plain-English breakdown of what each role actually involves throughout the year — not just during the review window.
TPC Member
The core of the committee. As a member you’ll typically review 8–12 papers per cycle, though this can run as high as 25 papers in years with heavier submission volume. You’ll also participate in your subcommittee’s discussion phase, attend the annual TPC meeting (in person or virtually), and be present at the conference itself. You’re also a representative of the community — your reviews should be thorough, fair, and constructive regardless of outcome.
- Complete all assigned reviews by the posted deadline (no extensions)
- Participate in the online discussion phase for borderline papers
- Attend or dial in to the TPC meeting in January
- Register and attend the conference; participate in your subcommittee’s sessions
- Declare conflicts of interest within 48 hours of receiving paper assignments
Subcommittee Co-Chair
Co-Chairs support the Chair in managing the subcommittee’s workflow and serve as backup when the Chair is unavailable. In practice this means helping with paper assignments, monitoring review progress, and leading discussion on a subset of papers during the TPC meeting.
- All Member duties, plus:
- Assist with paper-to-reviewer matching within the subcommittee
- Follow up with members who haven’t completed reviews on time
- Lead discussion on assigned borderline papers at the TPC meeting
- Identify strong candidates for Best Paper nomination
Subcommittee Chair
The Chair owns the subcommittee end-to-end. This is the most demanding TPC role outside of the TPC Chair position itself. You’re responsible for the quality and completeness of all reviews in your area, and you’re the primary presenter at the TPC meeting.
- All Co-Chair duties, plus:
- Assign papers to reviewers (balancing load and avoiding COI)
- Prepare and present subcommittee summary at TPC meeting
- Make preliminary accept/reject recommendations for non-borderline papers
- Coordinate with TPC Chair on any policy questions or unusual cases
- Submit a short post-conference report summarizing subcommittee observations
8–12 papers per cycle is the typical range, though this can run as high as 25 in years with heavier submission volume. If your assignment seems unusually high for the current cycle, contact your subcommittee chair. Overloaded reviewers produce lower-quality reviews — it’s better to reassign early than submit rushed work late.
Term Limits & Rotation
CICC uses a 5-year standard term limit for TPC members. This policy exists to keep the committee fresh, avoid entrenchment, and give new voices access to the process. Here’s how it works in practice.
Standard Members
A member serving in any TPC role (Member, Co-Chair, or Chair) accumulates service years counted from their first year on the committee. After 5 active years, they rotate off. Years on approved leave (see Absence Policy) do not count toward the limit.
Chairs and Co-Chairs
Subcommittee Chairs typically serve 1 year as Chair before stepping back to Member or rotating off entirely, regardless of total years. In certain circumstances — such as a lack of a ready successor, or continuity needs around a major review-process change — a Chair may extend to a second year. Co-Chairs are expected to take on the Chair role after 1 year as Co-Chair, creating a natural leadership pipeline.
| Role | Typical Duration | Natural Progression |
|---|---|---|
| Member | Up to 5 years | → Co-Chair or continue as Member |
| Co-Chair | 1 year | → Chair |
| Chair | 1 year (up to 2 in certain circumstances) | → Rotate off or step back to Member |
| TPC Vice-Chair | 1 year | → TPC Chair |
| TPC Chair | 1 year | → Past Chair / Steering Committee |
Fellows
A member may be designated as a CICC Fellow by the Steering Committee, which exempts them from the standard 5-year rotation. This designation recognizes exceptional long-term service and is granted sparingly — typically to members who also hold IEEE Fellow status and whose continued participation demonstrably strengthens the committee. Fellows must still declare COI and complete review assignments.
Rotation can be deferred by up to one year with written approval from the TPC Chair and General Chair, in cases where losing a member would create a significant coverage gap in a subcommittee. This is not a renewable extension — after the deferral year, rotation is mandatory unless Fellow status is granted.
Absence Policy
Life happens. The absence policy is designed to be fair without creating a free pass that undermines the committee’s functioning.
The review process is the most important task a TPC member performs. Missing it without prior notice to both the Subcommittee Chair and the TPC Chair is grounds for removal from the committee.
- Planned absences (sabbatical, parental leave, major health event) must be declared to the TPC Chair before the submission deadline. Approved absences do not count toward the 5-year term limit.
- Single-year absences are generally approved without issue. Multi-year absences require Steering Committee review.
- Unannounced missed reviews — submitting fewer than 80% of assigned reviews without prior notice — will be flagged. A second occurrence in consecutive cycles results in removal from the committee.
- TPC meeting absence — members unable to attend the TPC meeting must notify their subcommittee chair in advance and submit written comments on their assigned borderline papers.
Conflict of Interest
CICC uses double-blind review: reviewers do not know the identity of authors during the review phase, and authors do not know who is reviewing their paper. However, COI declarations are still critical to prevent bias in paper assignment and TPC meeting discussion.
What counts as a COI?
- Current or former students, advisors, or close collaborators (within the past 5 years)
- Current colleagues at the same institution or company
- Co-authors on papers within the past 3 years
- Close family members
- Any relationship where you could not objectively evaluate the work
If you’re unsure whether a relationship constitutes a COI, declare it anyway. The subcommittee chair will reassign the paper. Undisclosed COIs discovered after decisions are made can invalidate accept decisions and damage the conference’s credibility.
Declare a COI based only on what you already know — for example, that a paper on a topic you know a colleague was working on has been submitted. Do not ask people you might have a COI with whether they’ve submitted a paper; doing so undermines the double-blind process for everyone involved.
How to declare a COI in Ex Ordo
Log in to Ex Ordo, navigate to your paper assignments, and use the “Declare Conflict” option next to any paper where a COI exists. Do this within 48 hours of receiving your assignments. The paper will be reassigned without penalty to you.
Code of Conduct
As a TPC member you have access to unpublished research. The following rules are non-negotiable:
- Confidentiality: Do not share, discuss, or cite submitted papers outside the review process. This applies during and after the review cycle.
- Delete papers after review: Reviewers must delete all assigned papers from their devices once the review process has concluded.
- No author contact: Do not contact authors whose papers you are reviewing, and do not inform authors that you are reviewing their work.
- No self-promotion: Do not use your TPC role to influence decisions on papers from your institution, collaborators, or competitors.
- Constructive reviews: Reviews must be substantive. A review that simply says “reject” without explanation is not acceptable and will be returned for revision.
- Inclusive participation: CICC is committed to an inclusive environment. Discriminatory or disrespectful conduct in reviews, meetings, or at the conference is grounds for removal from the committee.
Review Timeline
The review process runs from the submission close in mid-November through author notifications in mid-January — roughly eight weeks. Every day in that window matters.
The “When” column is the reusable, relative definition for this table. The “Example Date” column pins that to the 2026–27 cycle as a concrete reference point — swap in that cycle’s actual dates each year so the template doesn’t drift.
| Phase | When | Example Date (2026–27 cycle) | Who | What Happens |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Submission Close | Mid-November (submission deadline) | Nov 16, 2026 | Program Specialist | Ex Ordo closes. Submission count confirmed. Paper list distributed to TPC Chair. |
| COI Declaration | Immediately after submission close, before paper assignment | Nov 17–19, 2026 | All Reviewers | Reviewers declare conflicts of interest before any papers are assigned, so assignments can route around declared conflicts from the outset. |
| Reshuffling & Reassignment | 1–2 days after submission close | Nov 17–18, 2026 | Subcommittee Chairs | Papers are checked for correct subcommittee placement and reshuffled/reassigned before formal reviewer assignment. |
| Paper Assignment | ~1 week after submission close | Nov 20–25, 2026 | Subcommittee Chairs | Papers assigned to 5 reviewers each, factoring in declared COIs. Assignment sheets compiled and sent to Ex Ordo for import. |
| Initial Reviews | Late November – Early January | Nov 30, 2026 – Jan 4, 2027 | All Reviewers | All reviews submitted via Ex Ordo. Minimum 5 reviews per paper required. |
| Discussion Phase | 1 week before the TPC Selection Meeting (TPC2) | Dec 31, 2026 – Jan 6, 2027 | Subcommittee Chairs + Members | Borderline papers discussed in Ex Ordo forum. Chairs solicit additional opinions as needed. |
| TPC Selection Meeting (TPC2) | Early-to-mid January (2 consecutive days) | Jan 7–8, 2027 | All TPC | Borderline decisions finalized. Best Paper nominations made. Final tallies confirmed. The final day is typically run by subcommittee chairs without IEEE staff. |
| Author Notification | Mid-January | Jan 11–12, 2027 | Program Specialist | Accept/reject emails sent via Ex Ordo to corresponding authors. |
Review Criteria
Reviews are weighted 70% Technical Merit (Originality and Impact) and 30% Presentation. Separately, Results & Validation is treated as a gating criterion: regardless of how strong the Originality, Impact, or Presentation scores are, a paper whose results aren’t solid or properly validated should be scored as low technical merit — the weighting isn’t a substitute for that judgment call.
Technical Merit — 70% of score
Originality
Does the work present a genuinely new technique, circuit topology, system architecture, or insight? Compare carefully against cited and uncited prior work. Incremental improvements to known solutions score lower unless the improvement is substantial and the application is compelling.
Impact
Will this work matter to the community? Does it enable a new application, break a fundamental performance barrier, or establish a new design methodology? A technically correct paper with no clear impact on the field is a weak accept at best.
Are the claims backed by measured silicon results? Simulation-only papers are generally not accepted for regular sessions. Evaluate whether the test conditions are realistic, whether a comparison table with state-of-the-art is included and fair, and whether the figures of merit are appropriate for the application. Weak or unvalidated results should pull down a paper’s Technical Merit score directly, independent of how novel or impactful the underlying idea is — this is a precondition for acceptance, not just one input among several.
Presentation — 30% of score
Presentation & Completeness
Is the paper well written and clearly organized within the 4-page limit? Are all key specifications reported? Is the die photo included with area breakdown? Presentation issues alone should not cause rejection, but significant gaps in reported data are a legitimate concern.
Scoring & Decisions
Ex Ordo uses a 1–6 numeric scale:
| Score | Label | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Strong Accept | Excellent on all criteria. Nominate for Best Paper consideration. |
| 5 | Accept | Clearly above the bar. Accept without hesitation. |
| 4 | Weak Accept | Above the bar but with minor concerns. Likely accept pending discussion. |
| 3 | Weak Reject | Below the bar but not without merit. Requires discussion phase. |
| 2 | Reject | Below the bar. Clearly not ready for publication. |
| 1 | Strong Reject | Fundamental flaws, non-original, or missing measured results. |
Handling Borderline Papers
Papers with average scores between 3 and 4, or with high reviewer disagreement (e.g. one Strong Accept and one Strong Reject), enter the discussion phase. During this phase:
- The subcommittee chair opens a discussion thread in Ex Ordo
- Reviewers are asked to read each other’s reviews and respond
- If consensus is not reached online, the paper is presented at the TPC meeting
- The subcommittee chair presents a recommendation; the full TPC votes
- In ties, the TPC Chair has the casting vote
Subcommittee Chairs submit up to 2 nominations per subcommittee to the Best Paper & Awards committee by the TPC meeting date. Nominated papers undergo a second independent review by the Awards committee during the conference.
Using Ex Ordo
CICC uses Ex Ordo (exordo.com) as its paper management system. Here’s what you need to know as a reviewer:
- Account: Use your institutional email. If you don’t have an Ex Ordo account, create one at exordo.com before assignments are sent.
- Assignments: You’ll receive an email when papers are assigned. Log in to Ex Ordo → Reviews → My Reviews to see your queue.
- Submitting a review: Click the paper title, fill in the review form, enter your score, and click Submit. Reviews can be edited until the review deadline.
- Discussion: After the review deadline, the Discussion tab becomes active for borderline papers. Participate here — subcommittee chairs can see who has and hasn’t engaged.
- COI: If you see a paper you have a conflict with, click “I have a conflict” immediately. Do not read the paper before declaring.
Ex Ordo logs all paper downloads. Accessing papers outside your assignment list is a policy violation. If you believe you should be reviewing a paper that wasn’t assigned to you, contact your subcommittee chair.
Paper Templates
All submissions must use the official CICC templates. The templates enforce the correct formatting, margins, and font sizes — do not modify them structurally. Share these links with authors who ask.
| Template | Format | Use For | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regular Paper — Blind | 4 pages max | Regular technical session submissions (review copy) | Download .docx |
| Regular Paper — Non-Blind | 4 pages max | Regular technical session submissions (camera-ready) | Download .docx |
| Invited Paper | 4–8 pages | Invited speaker papers (non-blind only) | Download .docx |
Camera-ready papers must be validated through IEEE PDF eXpress before final submission. Authors receive instructions after acceptance. See the PDF eXpress guide for details.
Presentation Slides Guidelines
CICC does have its own presentation template — use it to help ensure a consistent standard of presentation quality across sessions. [Template link to be added once confirmed with IEEE/Program Specialist.] The following guidelines apply to all oral presentations.
The presenting author must be genuinely familiar with the work, able to field questions, and not merely reading off the slides. Several session chairs have flagged this as a real quality concern: when the presenting author couldn’t attend and a third party stepped in on-site without deep familiarity with the work, the presentation quality suffered noticeably. If the presenting author can’t attend, the substitute presenter needs to be prepared well in advance — not brought in as a last-minute stand-in.
A TPC contributor described 2026 session lengths as: short papers — 15 minutes total (new format), regular papers — 25 minutes total, invited papers — 50 minutes total. That doesn’t match the breakdown below (15+5 / 25+10). Please confirm current durations and the presentation/Q&A split within each with the Steering Committee, and whether “short papers” should be added as a distinct session type.
- Duration: Regular papers — 15 minutes presentation + 5 minutes Q&A. Invited papers — 25 minutes + 10 minutes Q&A.
- Format: 16:9 widescreen. Submit as PDF or PowerPoint to the session chair at least 24 hours before your session.
- Slide count: Aim for 1 slide per minute. A dense 20-slide deck for a 15-minute talk will run over.
- Die photo: Include a labeled die photo with area breakdown if space permits — it’s expected by CICC audiences.
- Comparison table: A state-of-the-art comparison table in the final slides is strongly encouraged, even if it wasn’t in the paper.
- Branding: IEEE and CICC logos may be added to the title slide. Excessive company branding on content slides is discouraged.
Email Templates
Standard email templates for common TPC communications. Customize as appropriate — these are starting points, not form letters.
Recruiting a New TPC Member
Dear [Name],
I’m writing on behalf of the IEEE Custom Integrated Circuits Conference (CICC) to invite you to join our Technical Program Committee for [YEAR] in the [Subcommittee Name] subcommittee.
As a TPC member, you would be asked to review approximately 8–12 papers in your area of expertise (occasionally up to 25 in heavier years), participate in our online discussion phase in December, and attend or join the TPC meeting in January. The conference takes place in [Location] in [Month].
Your work on [specific research area] would be a valuable contribution to our review process. We would be delighted to have you involved.
Please let me know by [date] if you’re able to participate. I’m happy to answer any questions about the time commitment or process.
Best regards,
[TPC Chair Name]
Technical Program Chair, CICC [YEAR]
Chasing a Late Review
Dear [Name],
A quick reminder that you have [N] reviews pending in Ex Ordo that are due [DATE]. We’re tracking review completion closely this year and need all reviews in on time to keep the author notification schedule.
If you have a conflict with any of your assigned papers, please declare it in Ex Ordo right away and I’ll reassign. If there’s another issue I should know about, please reply to this email.
Thanks for your continued contribution to CICC.
Best,
[Subcommittee Chair Name]
Notifying a Member of Approaching Term Limit
Dear [Name],
Thank you for your [N] years of service on the CICC Technical Program Committee — your contributions to the [Subcommittee] subcommittee have been genuinely valuable.
Under CICC’s standard rotation policy, your current term concludes after the [YEAR] cycle. I wanted to give you early notice so we can plan the transition thoughtfully.
There are a few paths forward that I’d like to discuss with you: [options as applicable — e.g. transition to org committee role, Fellow designation consideration, recommendation for SSCS involvement]. Would you be open to a short call in the coming weeks?
Thank you again for everything you’ve contributed.
Warm regards,
[TPC Chair Name]
ED Session Invite
Dear [Name],
On behalf of the CICC [YEAR] Organizing Committee, I’d like to invite you to [organize / present in] an ED Session at this year’s conference in [Location] in [Month].
We think your expertise in [topic area] would make for a compelling session for our attendees. The session would run [duration] and cover [proposed scope].
Please let me know by [date] whether you’re able to participate, and I’ll follow up with logistics and formatting guidance.
Best regards,
[Organizing Committee Contact Name]
Panel Invite
Dear [Name],
I’m writing to invite you to serve as a panelist for our CICC [YEAR] panel session on [topic], scheduled for [date/time] during the conference in [Location].
We’re bringing together [N] panelists from [industry/academia] to discuss [panel theme], moderated by [Moderator Name]. Given your work on [specific area], your perspective would add a lot to the discussion.
The session runs approximately [duration], with a short position statement from each panelist followed by moderated discussion and audience Q&A. Please let me know by [date] if you’re able to join.
Best regards,
[Organizing Committee Contact Name]
Forum Invite
Dear [Name],
I’d like to invite you to [attend / contribute to] this year’s CICC Forum on [topic], taking place [date/time] in [Location] as part of the [YEAR] conference program.
[Brief description of forum format and goals.]
Please confirm your [attendance / contribution] by [date] so we can finalize the program.
Best regards,
[Organizing Committee Contact Name]
TPC1 / TPC2 Meeting Notice
Dear [Subcommittee Name] TPC Members,
This is the formal notice for our [TPC1 / TPC2] meeting, scheduled for [date(s)] at [time / time zone], held [in person in Location / virtually via Link].
Agenda: [brief agenda — e.g. TPC Chair welcome and Subcommittee Chair breakout sessions to summarize proposals for TPC1; borderline paper discussion and final decisions for TPC2].
Please come prepared with [assigned reading / your review scores / discussion notes] ahead of the meeting. Let me know by [date] if you’re unable to attend so we can arrange for written input in advance.
Best,
[Subcommittee Chair Name]
Paper Review Meeting Notice
Dear [Name],
We’ll be holding our paper review meeting on [date] at [time / time zone], [in person in Location / virtually via Link], to discuss borderline papers ahead of final decisions.
Please review the discussion list in Ex Ordo beforehand and come prepared to speak to any papers you reviewed that are flagged for discussion. If you can’t attend, please submit written comments by [date] so your input is included.
Thanks for your continued work on this cycle’s review.
Best,
[Subcommittee Chair Name]
New Member Welcome (Per Subcommittee)
Dear [Name],
Welcome aboard! We’re glad to have you join the [Subcommittee Name] subcommittee for CICC [YEAR].
A few things to get you oriented: you’ll receive your Ex Ordo login and paper assignments around [timeframe]. Our subcommittee typically reviews [N] papers per member per cycle, with a discussion phase before the TPC meeting in January. I’ll also loop you into our subcommittee’s planning meeting on [date].
In the meantime, please make sure you’ve completed the CICC confidentiality agreement acknowledgment via the Google Form if you haven’t already, and feel free to reach out with any questions about the process.
Looking forward to working with you this cycle.
Best,
[Subcommittee Chair Name]