Skip to yearly menu bar Skip to main content


ICML 2025 Position Paper CFP

 

We invite the submission of position papers to be published at the ICML 2025 conference. Position papers make an argument for a viewpoint or perspective about what should be done, in contrast to research track papers, which report on advances that have already been accomplished.  Position papers also generally adopt a meta-level perspective on the field of machine learning, with wider scope than any individual area.

The review criteria for position papers differs from those of the main conference track.  Submissions to the main ICML conference track emphasize original research and novel results.  In contrast, submissions to the position paper track will be judged primarily on whether they present a compelling position that warrants greater exposure within the machine learning community (regardless of whether a reviewer agrees with the position).  The goal of this track is to highlight papers that stimulate (productive, civil) discussion on timely topics that need our community’s input.  Controversial topics are welcome.

Position papers should meet standard ICML expectations for scholarship, including the use of evidence and reasoning to support claims, inclusion of relevant background and context, and the attribution of others’ work via appropriate citations.  Accepted position papers will be presented at the conference (as oral talks or posters) and included in the conference proceedings.  

We want to hear your ideas. What is the field getting right?  Getting wrong?  Position papers may address any aspect relevant to machine learning, including (but very much not limited to) discussions such as the following:

  • Concerns about data legality, copyright, and intellectual property in model training procedures
  • The role of privacy in machine learning training and deployment
  • The role of open-source versus closed-source ML models for research 
  • Regulation of ML technology (licensing, evaluation, disclosures, post-deployment monitoring, etc.)
  • Ethical considerations when conducting ML research
  • Ethical considerations when deploying ML systems
  • User guidance for responsible use of ML tools, services, applications, etc.
  • What the next generation of ML researchers needs to know
  • How we can improve the ways that we conduct and evaluate machine learning research
  • How we can improve the beneficial impact of our community’s work

We encourage you to browse the position papers that were published at ICML 2024 for examples (and ideas to build on, or from which to offer an alternative position).

Policies and Requirements

The formatting requirements (including 8-page limit), double-blind reviewing, policies (including plagiarism, dual review, ethics review, etc.), and deadlines for position papers are identical to those of the main conference, as described in the main Call for Papers.  Please note the new requirements this year for (1) reciprocal reviewing and (2) a “lay summary” of papers that are accepted for publication. 

The following additional requirements apply to position papers:

  1. The Title should state the position and start with “Position:”.
    • These hypothetical paper titles do state a position:
      • "Position: Quantum Atelic Learning Methods Should Employ Psychic Insights"
      • "Position: Stop Research on Psychic Properties of Machine Learning"
    • while these versions do not:
      • "Position: Psychic Quantum Atelic Learning"
      • "Position: A Perspective on Psychic Quantum Atelic Learning"
  2. The Abstract must identify the paper as a position paper and briefly state the position (e.g., “This position paper argues that <statement of the position>.”)
  3. The Introduction must state the position, using bold text.
  4. The paper must include an “Alternative Views” section that describes and addresses one or more viable (not strawmen) positions that are opposed to the paper’s position.
  5. Papers that describe new research without advocating a position are not responsive to this call and should instead be submitted to the main paper track.

Important Dates and Submission Site

  • Submission site open: January 9, 2025.
  • Suggested OpenReview account creation deadline: January 9, 2025. (If you do not already have an OpenReview account, please register by this date, otherwise we cannot guarantee that your account will be activated in time.**)
  • Abstract submission deadline: January 23, 2025 AoE (Jan 24 2025 12 Noon UTC-0).
  • Full paper submission deadline: January 30, 2025 AoE (Jan 31 2025 12 Noon UTC-0).

Position papers can be submitted through OpenReview: openreview.net/group?id=ICML.cc/2025/Position_Paper_Track 

Note: regular research papers should be submitted through a separate OpenReview site, as outlined in the Call for Papers.

**OpenReview: All authors must have an OpenReview account. It is strongly recommended that you sign-up for OpenReview (or associate your existing account) with an institutional email. If you sign up for OpenReview with an institutional email your account will be activated immediately; otherwise it can take up to 2 weeks for your account to be activated.

Reviewing

Position papers will be reviewed according to the following criteria, which differ from those employed by the main track.

  1. Position: The paper clearly states a position on a machine learning topic (policy, implementation, deployment, monitoring, etc.).  Examples include (but are not limited to) an argument in favor of or against a particular research direction (not a particular algorithm or solution), a call to action, a value statement, a policy proposal, or a recommendation for changes to how we conduct and evaluate research.

    Papers that describe new research without advocating a position are not responsive to this call and should instead be submitted to the main paper track.
  2. Support: The paper supports its position with clear reasoning and evidence where appropriate.
  3. Significance: The paper demonstrates that the topic is important, in terms of scope, impact, timeliness, risks, benefits, etc.
  4. Discussion potential: The topic is likely to inspire constructive, useful discussion within the ICML community. The reviewer need not agree with the stated position.
  5. Alternative views: The paper describes and addresses one or more viable (not strawmen) positions that are opposed to the paper’s position.
  6. Communication quality: The paper is well organized and clearly written.
  7. Context: The paper includes a discussion of (and citations to) literature and events relevant to the stated position.