By name: ijcai-submission description: Use when auditing an IJCAI or IJCAI-ECAI main-track submission for Chairing Tool readiness, abstract and author-information deadlines, page limits, double-blind anonymity, supplementary files, reproducibility, resubmission information, author limits, dual-submission policy, and LLM-use policy.
IJCAI Submission
Use this for an IJCAI main-track submission audit. Reopen the current conference CFP, Author Kit, FAQ, reproducibility page, submission site, and conflict policy before giving deadline-ready advice.
Submission audit
- Confirm the target program: main track, one of the special tracks, Survey Track, or a non-main program. Track rules and deadlines can differ.
- Verify Chairing Tool account access, title, abstract, author details, ORCID status, author confirmations, keywords, conflicts, and any Primary Paper Initiative fee exposure.
- Apply the current author kit. IJCAI-ECAI 2026 main-track papers used a 9-page total limit: 7 pages for body text, figures, and tables, plus up to 2 pages for references.
- Check that no acknowledgements or contribution statements appear in the anonymous review version, and that the optional ethics statement sits where current rules permit.
- Enforce double-blind anonymity in PDF content, metadata, filenames, supplement, code, paths, URLs, and resubmission files.
- Submit supplementary material and resubmission information by the full-paper deadline; do not rely on rebuttal-time uploads.
- Confirm the per-author submission limit, dual-submission policy, and last-12-month rejection disclosure before upload.
- Apply the current LLM-use policy. For IJCAI-ECAI 2026, style/language polishing was allowed, but LLM-written manuscript text was a desk-reject risk.
Blocking risks
- Missing abstract registration or missing author information.
- Overlength PDF or template manipulation.
- Identity leakage in the paper, supplement, code, data, paths, or metadata.
- Missing required resubmission information for a recent rejected version.
- Concurrent formal archival submission.
- LLM-generated paper text, hallucinated references, or unsupported claims.
Desk-reject risk matrix
IJCAI screens a large submission volume and can reject on mechanical grounds before any scientific review. Sort each risk by whether it is auto-fatal at intake.
| Risk | Severity | Pre-upload check |
|---|---|---|
| Missing abstract registration | Fatal | Abstract filed by its earlier deadline |
| Overlength or template manipulation | Fatal | Page count and Author Kit style verified |
| Anonymity leak in PDF/metadata/code | Fatal | Names, URLs, filenames scrubbed |
| Missing resubmission file | Fatal | Anonymized rejected version attached |
| Concurrent archival submission | Fatal | No venue overlap during review |
| LLM-written manuscript text | High | Only policy-allowed polishing |
Worked vignette: a multi-agent paper at intake
A multi-agent RL paper is ready scientifically but its anonymized PDF embeds the lab name in a figure caption and its code ZIP keeps an institutional path. Both are anonymity leaks that can desk-reject the paper before review. Fix order: scrub the caption and metadata, re-zip with relative paths, confirm the page count, verify the abstract was registered on time, and confirm no concurrent archival submission.
Reviewer/chair pushback and the venue-specific fix
- "Exceeds the limit." Compress to the body limit and move overflow to the appendix; do not shrink margins, fonts, or spacing to fake compliance.
Output format
[IJCAI readiness] Ready / Needs fixes / Not ready
[Track] main / special / survey / other
[Blocking checks] <page/anonymity/authors/ORCID/supplement/resubmission/dual-submission/LLM>
[Highest desk-reject risk] <one issue>
[Fix order] <ordered fixes before submission>