ICLR Submission
Use this for an ICLR main-conference submission audit. Reopen the current CFP, Author Guide,
OpenReview submission form, template, Code of Ethics, Code of Conduct, and LLM policy before giving
deadline-ready advice.
Submission audit
- Confirm the target is the ICLR main conference, not a workshop, Tiny Paper, blog, affinity event,
or later publication track.
- Check that all authors have complete OpenReview profiles and that the author list follows the
current freeze/change windows.
- Verify that the abstract is substantive and non-duplicative before the abstract deadline; do not
rely on a placeholder.
- Confirm use of the current ICLR LaTeX template and current page-limit rules. In 2026, submissions
used 9 pages of main text, references outside the limit, and appendices after references.
- Inspect anonymity in the PDF, appendices, supplementary ZIP, code, data, demos, links, repository
metadata, comments, acknowledgments, and file names.
- Confirm reciprocal-reviewing compliance for the author team unless the current cycle grants an
explicit exemption.
- Complete any LLM-use disclosure truthfully. Hidden prompt injection, hallucinated citations, or
undisclosed LLM-written scientific content can become ethics issues.
Desk-reject and integrity risks
- Late or missing abstract/full paper.
- New author added after the author-list deadline.
- Template manipulation, over-limit main text, or missing required fields.
- Non-anonymous public links, repository ownership, analytics, demo login, or organization slug.
- Dual submission to another archival venue that violates current ICLR policy.
- Unclear LLM disclosure or review-manipulation text.
- Reciprocal-reviewing noncompliance.
Desk-reject triage table
ICLR enforcement is strict and the consequences are public: even a withdrawn submission leaves a
visible OpenReview trace. Triage the highest-probability rejections first.
| Risk |
Quick test |
Fix before deadline |
| De-anonymization |
Grep PDF and ZIP for names, remotes, buckets |
Strip metadata, neutralize links |
| Over-limit main text |
Count pages against the current rule |
Move material after references |
| Author-list change |
Check the freeze window in the CFP |
Finalize authors before the cutoff |
| Dual submission |
Confirm no archival overlap |
Withdraw or rescope the other venue |
| LLM disclosure |
Confirm the form field is truthful |
Disclose; remove hallucinated citations |
Worked vignette
A team submits an LLM fine-tuning paper whose anonymized repo link points to a GitHub org naming the
lab, with a caption thanking a named cluster. Both leak identity. The fix: replace the link with an
anonymized supplement ZIP, remove the acknowledgment until camera-ready, re-grep the PDF for the
cluster name, and confirm all authors completed OpenReview profiles before the freeze.
Reviewer-pushback patterns
- "Looks like a workshop paper." Reframe for the main track or route elsewhere.
- "Possible dual submission." Document why the other version is non-archival under current policy.
Output format
[ICLR readiness] Ready / Needs fixes / Not ready
[OpenReview state] profiles / abstract / paper / supplement / reviewer nomination
[Blocking risks] <anonymity/page-limit/dual-submission/LLM/reciprocal-reviewing>
[Fix order] <highest-impact fixes before deadline>
[Current-cycle pages to reopen] <CFP, Author Guide, OpenReview group, template, LLM policy>
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → ICLR-Skills/skills/iclr-submission/SKILL.md
1---2name: iclr-submission3description: Use when auditing an ICLR main-conference submission for OpenReview readiness, double-blind anonymity, page limits, reciprocal reviewing, LLM-use disclosure, dual-submission policy, supplementary material, and desk-reject risk.4---5
6
7# ICLR Submission
8
9Use this for an ICLR main-conference submission audit. Reopen the current CFP, Author Guide,
10OpenReview submission form, template, Code of Ethics, Code of Conduct, and LLM policy before giving
11deadline-ready advice.
12
13## Submission audit
14
15- Confirm the target is the ICLR main conference, not a workshop, Tiny Paper, blog, affinity event,
16 or later publication track.
17- Check that all authors have complete OpenReview profiles and that the author list follows the
18 current freeze/change windows.
19- Verify that the abstract is substantive and non-duplicative before the abstract deadline; do not
20 rely on a placeholder.
21- Confirm use of the current ICLR LaTeX template and current page-limit rules. In 2026, submissions
22 used 9 pages of main text, references outside the limit, and appendices after references.
23- Inspect anonymity in the PDF, appendices, supplementary ZIP, code, data, demos, links, repository
24 metadata, comments, acknowledgments, and file names.
25- Confirm reciprocal-reviewing compliance for the author team unless the current cycle grants an
26 explicit exemption.
27- Complete any LLM-use disclosure truthfully. Hidden prompt injection, hallucinated citations, or
28 undisclosed LLM-written scientific content can become ethics issues.
29
30## Desk-reject and integrity risks
31
32- Late or missing abstract/full paper.
33- New author added after the author-list deadline.
34- Template manipulation, over-limit main text, or missing required fields.
35- Non-anonymous public links, repository ownership, analytics, demo login, or organization slug.
36- Dual submission to another archival venue that violates current ICLR policy.
37- Unclear LLM disclosure or review-manipulation text.
38- Reciprocal-reviewing noncompliance.
39
40## Desk-reject triage table
41
42ICLR enforcement is strict and the consequences are public: even a withdrawn submission leaves a
43visible OpenReview trace. Triage the highest-probability rejections first.
44
45| Risk | Quick test | Fix before deadline |
46| --- | --- | --- |
47| De-anonymization | Grep PDF and ZIP for names, remotes, buckets | Strip metadata, neutralize links |
48| Over-limit main text | Count pages against the current rule | Move material after references |
49| Author-list change | Check the freeze window in the CFP | Finalize authors before the cutoff |
50| Dual submission | Confirm no archival overlap | Withdraw or rescope the other venue |
51| LLM disclosure | Confirm the form field is truthful | Disclose; remove hallucinated citations |
52
53## Worked vignette
54
55A team submits an LLM fine-tuning paper whose anonymized repo link points to a GitHub org naming the
56lab, with a caption thanking a named cluster. Both leak identity. The fix: replace the link with an
57anonymized supplement ZIP, remove the acknowledgment until camera-ready, re-grep the PDF for the
58cluster name, and confirm all authors completed OpenReview profiles before the freeze.
59
60## Reviewer-pushback patterns
61
62- "Looks like a workshop paper." Reframe for the main track or route elsewhere.
63- "Possible dual submission." Document why the other version is non-archival under current policy.
64
65## Output format
66
67```text
68[ICLR readiness] Ready / Needs fixes / Not ready
69[OpenReview state] profiles / abstract / paper / supplement / reviewer nomination
70[Blocking risks] <anonymity/page-limit/dual-submission/LLM/reciprocal-reviewing>
71[Fix order] <highest-impact fixes before deadline>
72[Current-cycle pages to reopen] <CFP, Author Guide, OpenReview group, template, LLM policy>
73```
74
75---
76
77**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `ICLR-Skills/skills/iclr-submission/SKILL.md`
thedixitjain