Skip to yearly menu bar Skip to main content


ICML 2026 Peer Review FAQ

This page addresses some frequently asked questions we have received regarding the peer review process for ICML 2026. Due to the high volume of emails we receive, we may not be able to respond to inquiries, especially to those that are already addressed on this page.

 

Email communications

Q: From whom should I expect emails about the ICML peer reviewing process?

A: Emails via OpenReview will come from noreply@openreview.net and icml2026-notifications@openreview.net. Please make sure those emails are able to make it past any email/spam filters.

Q: I have a question not answered on this page: [...]?

A: The (general) ICML FAQ page answers a number of questions about icml.cc accounts, conference logistics, payment, registration, travel documents, etc. If you still cannot find the answer to your question, please use the following form to direct your question to the most appropriate organizer: https://icml.cc/Help/Contact. We will try our best to get back to you or update this page with an answer as soon as possible.

 

Being an area chair or reviewer

Q: What are the qualifications to be an area chair for ICML?

A: ACs (a.k.a. meta-reviewers) must have seniority at least at the level of a junior faculty member in an academic institution (e.g., an assistant professor) or an industry equivalent. They must have substantial prior experience with reviewing for peer-reviewed conferences or journals. They must also have expertise and/or broad knowledge in multiple major sub-areas of machine learning.

The seniority and reviewing experience ensure that the AC is able to oversee and ensure the quality of work of several reviewers and provide feedback/guidance to reviewers where necessary. The expertise and broad knowledge ensure that the AC is able to judge the contributions and importance of the submissions relative to prior works and ultimately make recommendations about acceptance/rejection.

Q: I would like to volunteer to be an area chair for ICML 2026. How can I do this?

A: We have completed our initial round of area chair selection. You may still fill out the ICML 2026 AC nomination form, but we will only consider new nominations in case we need to recruit additional area chairs. All the nominations will be provided to ICML 2027 program chairs. (The form will close on January 16, 2026.) You will need to provide your OpenReview profile as part of this form submission.

Q: As an AC, how do I communicate with authors?

A: You can use the “Author AC Confidential Comments” button.

Q: What are the qualifications to be a reviewer for ICML?

A: Reviewers must have research experience equivalent to a second-year graduate student in machine learning or a related field. They must have been a primary author* on at least two peer-reviewed conference or journal papers published in a related venue (e.g., ICML, NeurIPS, ICLR, UAI, AISTATS, COLT, ALT, JMLR, TMLR, CVPR, ICCV, ACL, NAACL, EMNLP, SIMODS – note that this is not meant to be an exhaustive list). We strongly encourage each first-time reviewer to identify a ‘mentor’ (such as a research advisor or manager) who has both the necessary qualifications for and prior experience with reviewing, and who has agreed to oversee and assist the reviewer in their reviewing tasks.

The research experience ensures the reviewer is to be able to competently evaluate a submission’s methodology, interpret findings and results, and to evaluate contributions in the context of prior works. Prior authorship ensures that the reviewer understands the peer review process (at least from the side of the authors) and the standards and conventions of composing reviews and corresponding with authors.

*We leave it to your own discretion to interpret what is meant by "primary author", as this may vary between sub-areas of machine learning.

Q: What is the reviewing load for reviewers? Can I get a reduced reviewing load?

A: We are aiming for a load of around five submissions per reviewer. Unfortunately we are not allowing for reduced load reviewing this year.

Q: I would like to volunteer to be a reviewer for ICML 2026. How can I do this?

A: Please fill out the ICML 2026 reviewer nomination form. (It will close on January 16, 2026.) You will need to provide your OpenReview profile as part of this form submission.

 

Submitting a paper

Q: I missed the abstract (or full paper) submission deadline because of <insert very good reason>, can I get an extension?

A: Sorry, these deadlines are strict with no exception.

Q: I have a paper under submission to another conference. Is it okay under the Dual Submission Policy to also submit it to ICML 2026?

A: In order to comply with the ICML Dual Submission Policy, you must ensure that a paper of yours accepted or under review at another conference is not under submission to ICML 2026 by the full paper submission deadline. Note that the ICML 2026 full paper submission deadline is after the notification dates for both AISTATS 2026 and ICLR 2026, so you should be able to remove any potential dual submission from OpenReview in time.

Q: Is it possible to only submit an abstract, or to only submit a poster without a full paper?

A: No. We are only taking submissions for full (research) papers and position papers.

Q: Is it possible to submit a full paper without an abstract submission?

A: No. An abstract must first be submitted by the Abstract submission deadline on OpenReview. After submitting the abstract, it will be possible to modify the submission to also upload the full paper PDF, which must be uploaded by the Full paper submission deadline. See the Call For Papers for further details (e.g., what intervening modifications are allowed).

Q: Is it possible to present a paper virtually or in hybrid-mode?

A: The conference is planned to be an in-person event, with no support for virtual or hybrid presentation. However, authors of accepted papers are not required to attend the conference. In that case, their paper will still appear in the proceedings. For proceedings-only papers, at least one of the authors must obtain virtual registration. See the Call For Papers for further details.

Q: Which license should I choose?

A: Please see the OpenReview legal terms. (The arXiv license information page has related advice.)

Q: Can I modify the ICML LaTeX template (e.g., by commenting-out <insert LaTeX code here, like \printAffiliationsAndNotice>) so that I have more space for something else?

A: Modifying the template to gain an unfair "space" advantage relative to other authors is not allowed.

 

Conflict of Interest (COI)

Q: How do I update Conflict of Interest (COI) information in OpenReview?

A: Sign into your OpenReview account, go to your profile page, and switch to edit mode by clicking "Edit Profile" near the top. You should arrive at a page titled "Edit Profile", and you can switch between the various sections by clicking the numbers near the top of the page (corresponding to Names, Personal Info, Emails, Personal Links, History, Relations, and Expertise). Of particular relevance are Emails, History, and Relations. See https://icml.cc/Conferences/2026/ConflictOfInterestDefinitions for what is considered a COI for ICML 2026. Please also make sure the "Emails" part of your profile lists your institutional email addresses (e.g., from your university, lab, or workplace).

Q: I have a lot of co-authors, and it will take too much effort to enter them all as "relations" in my OpenReview profile. Is there anything I can do to reduce this effort?

A: Co-authors of your publications that appear in your OpenReview profile do not need to be explicitly entered as "Relations" in your profile. (OpenReview allows you to quickly import publications listed in your DBLP page; this can be accessed from the "Personal Links" section when you edit your profile.)

 

Double-blind reviewing

Q: I want to include a link to my code/data in my submission, but it includes information (e.g., a github username) that could reveal my identity. Does this violate the double-blind review policy?

A: Yes, this would violate the double-blind review policy. If you include a link to a code or data repository that includes any identifying information about you, your submission may be desk-rejected. Please anonymize any code/data/links that you include in your submission.

Q: Is it okay to search the internet for a submission that I am assigned to review? Is it okay that I have already seen a submission that I am assigned to review (and hence already know who the authors are)?

A: Reviewers should NOT search the internet (or elsewhere) for submissions they are assigned to review, as this could violate the double-blind review policy. Naturally, this is not something we can explicitly enforce, and reviewers may have legitimately already seen de-anonymized versions of submissions they are assigned (e.g., if a literature search turns up an arXiv preprint). But the goal of the double-blind review policy is to try to reduce biases that might arise from having knowledge of a submission's authors. Also reviewers should wait to have read the paper at least once before doing a literature search on the topic of the paper.