ijcai-topic-selection

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previously unpublished AI results with broad relevance to the AI community.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>