--- 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 ```text [IJCAI readiness] Ready / Needs fixes / Not ready [Track] main / special / survey / other [Blocking checks] [Highest desk-reject risk] [Fix order] ```