By name: ijcai-topic-selection description: Use when deciding whether an AI project is a strong IJCAI or IJCAI-ECAI fit, comparing main track versus special tracks, Survey Track, AIJ/JAIR expedited-publication potential, or alternative AI venues such as NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, AAAI, AISTATS, UAI, COLT, KDD, CVPR, ACL, or ICRA.
IJCAI Topic Selection
Use this before writing. IJCAI main-track submissions should report significant, original, previously unpublished AI results with broad relevance to the AI community.
Fit test
- Ask whether the paper advances an AI problem, AI technique, AI application domain, or cross-disciplinary AI boundary rather than only reporting an application result.
- Prefer IJCAI when the contribution is broadly AI-facing, technically complete in a compact format, and can survive a two-phase review process with limited response leverage.
- Consider special tracks for human-centered AI, AI for social good, AI4Tech, AI and health, or AI and robotics when the venue-specific framing is stronger than a general main-track frame.
- Consider the Survey Track only for mature areas and author teams with established topic expertise.
- Route elsewhere if the contribution is primarily ML theory, representation learning, computer vision, NLP, robotics, HCI, systems, or data mining and a specialist venue has a clearer audience.
- Check policy fit early: anonymity, recent rejection disclosures, dual-submission limits, data ethics, LLM-use constraints, and in-person presentation feasibility.
Venue routing matrix
IJCAI's edge is breadth and a compact format, but a sharply specialist contribution often finds a clearer audience elsewhere. Route by where the strongest reviewers and framing sit.
| Contribution profile | Strong IJCAI fit | Consider instead |
|---|---|---|
| Cross-cutting AI idea (search, KR, planning, multi-agent) readable across subfields | Yes, main track | — |
| Deep ML theory or representation learning | Sometimes | NeurIPS, ICML, COLT |
| Heavy CV or NLP system | Rarely the best home | CVPR, ACL |
| Mature area survey by established authors | Survey Track | Journal survey |
| Polished, complete result wanting fast journal route | Main track plus AIJ/JAIR ecosystem | — |
| Social-good or human-centered AI framing | Special track | Domain venue |
Worked vignette: a game-theory mechanism
A mechanism-design result for multi-agent resource allocation could go to an economics-and- computation venue or to IJCAI. If the contribution is an AI technique broadly relevant across agents, search, and learning audiences and fits a compact 7-page body, IJCAI's main track is a strong home; the game-theory/economic-paradigms scope is squarely in-bounds. If the core advance is a fine-grained economic-theory proof aimed at a specialist EC audience, route there instead. Decide by which reviewer pool best judges the central claim.
Reviewer/fit pushback and the venue-specific fix
- "This is an application, not an AI advance." Reframe the AI technique or problem contribution, or route to a domain venue.
- "Too specialized for a broad PC." Either broaden the framing for IJCAI breadth or choose the specialist venue with a clearer audience.
- "Survey from a junior team." Reserve the Survey Track for mature areas and established topic expertise.
Output format
[Fit] strong IJCAI / possible IJCAI / better elsewhere
[Best track] main / special / survey / other venue
[Contribution sentence] <one sentence>
[Top rejection risk] <novelty/clarity/evidence/policy/scope>
[Next action] <experiment, framing, related work, or venue switch>