Recently, an article by one of my colleagues had been accepted at an IEEE conference, and about a week ago, he presented it on the main track. He published a preprint of this paper (without final changes) in arXiv with the following copyright note in the PDF footer, which according to IEEE rules and regulations it looks like permitted to have it on arXiv:

Copyright © 20xx IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works by sending a request to [email protected].

Also, according to this answer and also this one, "IEEE policy permits authors to post their articles to the preprint repository arXiv."

Now about an hour ago, he received an email from the conference chair as follows:

IEEE crosscheck shows that the paper has been published at arxiv. This violates IEEE rules. Asked for confirmation within 24 hours to take down the paper from the web. If no confirmation is received, it is considered that the paper will be excluded from publication and submitted to IEEE Xplore

This sounds very strange to me. Did my colleague violate the IEEE rules and regulations in the first place by putting the paper in arXiv? Or did conference chairs perhaps miss the copyright notice (or the fact that the preprint is actually the original version of the paper) in the preprint version?

In your opinion, what would be the correct next move for my colleague in this case?

Update 1: The paper had not been reviewed under a double-blind review procedure.

Update 2: My colleague replied to the general chair with a complete explanation on how publishing a preprint in arXiv (with necessary copyright notes) is absolutely permitted based on IEEE rules and regulations. Unfortuently, the chair still believes it’s against the IEEE rules and regulations. He responded:

Thanks for the clarification. Make sure your paper have withdrawn by arXiv.

Update 3: ArXiv rejected my colleague's request for withdrawing the paper! ArXiv replied:

Please note that having a paper under review or newly published is not a sufficient reason for withdrawal, as previous version(s) will still be available to users.

arXiv is an electronic repository for research papers, and announced papers are meant to be available in perpetuity. The license applied by the submitter to the work cannot be revoked.

As a result, you request has been denied.

My colleague is now waiting for IEEE's response (contacted authors [at] ieee.org) to see what they can do to fix this issue.

Final update and status: My colleague notified IEEE and they directly contacted the conference chair and asked them to publish the article in IEEE Xplore. The conference chair then sent another email to my colleague after this, something like "After receiving further clarification from IEEE, we will submit your paper to IEEE Xplore." In short: all done! Thank you @jakebeal and others for all your updates, concern, and time

  • 38
    Seems to me like the conference chair is being evil...
    – Arno
    Aug 1, 2021 at 11:14
  • 6
    Take it up with IEEE.
    – Buffy
    Aug 1, 2021 at 11:15
  • 20
    Only IEEE can respond to your need. Contact them. There is at least a misunderstanding.
    – Buffy
    Aug 1, 2021 at 11:31
  • 8
    IEEE crosscheck shows that the paper has been published at arxiv. arXiv isn't really a publication venue, but whatever. The conference chair possibly doesn't know the procedures very well.
    – user136193
    Aug 1, 2021 at 13:32
  • 4
    @John_Krampf When the article is published on the IEEE Xplore, the posted version on arXiv should be updated with a full citation to the IEEE publication, including DOI. No other changes may be made. I'm pretty sure the general chair never checked for such details and only relied on IEEE CrossCheck results, as others also mentioned. Aug 1, 2021 at 22:29

2 Answers 2


I think that what you're seeing here is a conference chair who doesn't understand what arXiv is and is blindly applying the self-plagiarism policy.

The IEEE's current official FAQ on author rights has a question dedicated to arXiv that explicitly states that arXiv publication is permitted. Thus, there is no concern on that account.

The IEEE CrossCheck system, however, does not filter arXiv out of its web-crawling. Thus, if you've posted something to arXiv, CrossCheck will dutifully report that it has found a high similarity match to text found on arXiv. And this is where I think that things have gone wrong.

  • What CrossCheck actually does is report materials that should be examined to see whether they are (self-)plagiarism or not.
  • People who use CrossCheck sloppily, however, often don't bother with examining, and just assume that match = plagiarism.

Thus, I think your colleague is dealing with somebody who hasn't bothered to understand what CrossCheck found and is just reaching for a knee-jerk reject. I notice as well that the email you quote doesn't say how, exactly, the rules are being violated.

From this comes my recommendation for how to proceed. I would recommend writing back to the conference chair to ask for clarification, while pointing at the IEEE FAQ, something like:

My apologies, but I am confused. The IEEE author rights FAQ explicitly allows for posting of preprints on arXiv, so I don't think that can be the violation of IEEE rules that you are referring to. I don't think this can be a self-plagiarism issue since arXiv isn't a peer-reviewed publication. Does this conference have a different policy, and if so, can you please point me to which aspect my preprint is violating?

Hopefully, this will either lead the conference chair to understand that they have made a mistake or else point you to the actual issue that they have. If they're a martinet or a fool, however, they may still just demand the thing gets taken down, in which case you can attempt to do the arXiv withdrawal process, making sure to point the blame at the conference in the comments field.

Update based on responses from conference chair and arXiv:

The uninformative and inflexible response from the conference chair does not affect my advice: I believe it simply means you are going down the "martinet or fool" path.

Since arXiv has (appropriately) refused to take the publication down, there is now no path left but confrontation with the program chair. IEEE might be able to help in time, but you're dealing with a large and often slow-moving organization there, so if there isn't a response from IEEE within a day or so, it's going to have to be dealing with the conference instead.

Here, it may be useful to involve other people besides just the program chair. Most well-established conferences have some sort of steering committee or similar that is specifically designed to help ensure consistent behavior despite the year-to-year change in organizers. Writing to them to ask for help with dealing with the failure of the specific chair that your colleague is dealing with may be useful.

  • 5
    Thanks, @jakebeak for your thoughtful answer. I entirely agree with you. My colleague did exactly the same and we are waiting for an answer. I will update this question with their response as soon as he gets one. Aug 1, 2021 at 17:55
  • 7
    @DavidZ: But comments are disposable and can get deleted at any time. I think it's actually much better to put post-updates in the question itself. (That's a standard on other SE sites that I visit.) Aug 2, 2021 at 3:30
  • 14
    @DavidZ Strongly disagree that it doesn't matter — updating with the outcome provides a different kind of validation to the answer that votes and accepts do not. Answers to such questions are typically advice based on the answerers' past experiences, but who often haven't personally faced a closely similar situation before. In that case updates help record what actually worked in the specific case, even if anecdotal. (continued)
    – GoodDeeds
    Aug 2, 2021 at 10:03
  • 6
    @DavidZ (continued) There are often "answers" in the low quality post queue where new users ask what the outcome of a situation was, which (rightfully) get deleted, but ultimately do not help those visitors (who can't even comment) in any way. And in some cases, an update provides information useful for others in a stressful situation or is just nice to read.
    – GoodDeeds
    Aug 2, 2021 at 10:07
  • 10
    My colleague notified IEEE and they directly contacted the conference chair and asked them to publish the article in IEEE Xplore. The conference chair then sent another email to my colleague after this, something like "After receiving further clarification from IEEE, we will submit your paper to IEEE Xplore." In short: all done! Thank you @jakebeal for all your updates, concern, and time! Aug 4, 2021 at 10:15

That specific conference might have a stricter policy than that of IEEE (I don't know to what extent IEEE sponsorship implies adherence to certain policies). I'd thus do the following, in order:

  1. Check what the specific conference website has to say about this, and if this contrast with the general IEEE policy.
  2. Take down the arXiv submission, as requested, so that the article can be reviewed or accepted by the conference without further ado (this avoids damaging the submission while possibly fighting policies). Soon afterward, contact the conference chair communicating the action and asking for an explanation in view of the IEEE policies (without being confrontational, though).
  3. If the conference chair's explanation does not arrive or is not satisfactory, contact IEEE to see if there is anything irregular according to their policies and agreements with the conference organizers.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .