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previously unpublished AI results with broad relevance to the AI community.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>
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → IJCAI-Skills/skills/ijcai-topic-selection/SKILL.md
1---2name: ijcai-topic-selection3description: 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.4---567# IJCAI Topic Selection89Use this before writing. IJCAI main-track submissions should report significant, original,10previously unpublished AI results with broad relevance to the AI community.1112## Fit test1314- Ask whether the paper advances an AI problem, AI technique, AI application domain, or15 cross-disciplinary AI boundary rather than only reporting an application result.16- Prefer IJCAI when the contribution is broadly AI-facing, technically complete in a compact17 format, and can survive a two-phase review process with limited response leverage.18- Consider special tracks for human-centered AI, AI for social good, AI4Tech, AI and health,19 or AI and robotics when the venue-specific framing is stronger than a general main-track20 frame.21- Consider the Survey Track only for mature areas and author teams with established topic22 expertise.23- Route elsewhere if the contribution is primarily ML theory, representation learning,24 computer vision, NLP, robotics, HCI, systems, or data mining and a specialist venue has a25 clearer audience.26- Check policy fit early: anonymity, recent rejection disclosures, dual-submission limits,27 data ethics, LLM-use constraints, and in-person presentation feasibility.2829## Venue routing matrix3031IJCAI's edge is breadth and a compact format, but a sharply specialist contribution often finds32a clearer audience elsewhere. Route by where the strongest reviewers and framing sit.3334| Contribution profile | Strong IJCAI fit | Consider instead |35| --- | --- | --- |36| Cross-cutting AI idea (search, KR, planning, multi-agent) readable across subfields | Yes, main track | — |37| Deep ML theory or representation learning | Sometimes | NeurIPS, ICML, COLT |38| Heavy CV or NLP system | Rarely the best home | CVPR, ACL |39| Mature area survey by established authors | Survey Track | Journal survey |40| Polished, complete result wanting fast journal route | Main track plus AIJ/JAIR ecosystem | — |41| Social-good or human-centered AI framing | Special track | Domain venue |4243## Worked vignette: a game-theory mechanism4445A mechanism-design result for multi-agent resource allocation could go to an economics-and-46computation venue or to IJCAI. If the contribution is an AI technique broadly relevant across47agents, search, and learning audiences and fits a compact 7-page body, IJCAI's main track is a48strong home; the game-theory/economic-paradigms scope is squarely in-bounds. If the core49advance is a fine-grained economic-theory proof aimed at a specialist EC audience, route there50instead. Decide by which reviewer pool best judges the central claim.5152## Reviewer/fit pushback and the venue-specific fix5354- "This is an application, not an AI advance." Reframe the AI technique or problem contribution,55 or route to a domain venue.56- "Too specialized for a broad PC." Either broaden the framing for IJCAI breadth or choose the57 specialist venue with a clearer audience.58- "Survey from a junior team." Reserve the Survey Track for mature areas and established topic59 expertise.6061## Output format6263```text64[Fit] strong IJCAI / possible IJCAI / better elsewhere65[Best track] main / special / survey / other venue66[Contribution sentence] <one sentence>67[Top rejection risk] <novelty/clarity/evidence/policy/scope>68[Next action] <experiment, framing, related work, or venue switch>69```7071---7273**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `IJCAI-Skills/skills/ijcai-topic-selection/SKILL.md`