How do I install the Ijcai Topic Selection skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add brycewang-stanford/ijcai-topic-selection in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Ijcai Topic Selection safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Capability flags: docs only. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Ijcai Topic Selection?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Ijcai Topic Selection free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Ijcai Topic Selection?

brycewang-stanford (@brycewang-stanford) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Ijcai Topic Selection by brycewang-stanford

Name: Ijcai Topic Selection
Rating: 4.2 (5 reviews)
Author: brycewang-stanford

Ijcai Topic Selection

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.

brycewang-stanford Updated Sep 8, 2026 1k repo stars

File contents

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 IJCAI main-track submissions should report significant, original, previously unpublished AI results with broad relevance to the AI community.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>

---name: ijcai-topic-selectiondescription: 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 SelectionUse 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 matrixIJCAI's edge is breadth and a compact format, but a sharply specialist contribution often findsa 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 mechanismA 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 acrossagents, search, and learning audiences and fits a compact 7-page body, IJCAI's main track is astrong home; the game-theory/economic-paradigms scope is squarely in-bounds. If the coreadvance is a fine-grained economic-theory proof aimed at a specialist EC audience, route thereinstead. 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```text[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>```

Frequently asked questions