Peer review is at the heart of the research ecosystem. We rely on our peer reviewers to help validate findings, assess their significance, and identify misleading or fraudulent work.
For years, peer review work has not been appropriately recognized. Scientific contributions to the field have recently increased in an unprecedented manner making it impossible to ensure high quality peer reviews for all of them. In addition, the fragmented and anonymous nature of the work currently makes it difficult for researchers to prove their reviewing contributions. With increasing pressure to publish and inadequate recognition for review, it is easy to understand why many researchers devote inadequate attention to reviewing.
IJCAI is committed to revitalize and recognize the efforts of the reviewers by launching the Primary Paper Initiative (PPI) and use all of its proceeds to reward responsible peers and their service to the community as detailed below.
- Professional Responsibility and Recognition – Reviewing is a professional responsibility that must be conducted with diligence and skill. The quality and integrity of the peer review process requires that the reviewer be a qualified expert in the subject matter of the submission, that reviewers carefully read submissions prior to completing their review, that the reviewer takes responsibility for the complete contents of their review and is the sole author of that review, that the reviewer agrees to keep the contents of the submission and their review confidential (i.e. – no sharing of the submission or their review with students or any third parties without written permission by the Conference PC), that the decision maker shall read and consider the reviewers’ recommendations before making their decision, and that the reviewer communicates their review in writing to decision makers and that for papers sent out for external peer review, decision makers communicate their decisions to the author along with detailed and constructive written feedback and an explanation of the reasons for their decision. Reviewers may use generative AI or other third-party tools with the sole purpose of improving the quality and readability of the reviewer reports for the author, provided any and all parts of the review that would potentially identify the submission, author identities, reviewer identity, or other confidential content is removed prior to uploading into third party tools.
In addition, authors are expected to actively participate in the peer-review process, acknowledging the value and benefits derived from the reviews of their own submissions.
- Confidentiality of Submissions, Authors, and Reviews – Submissions must remain confidential and only accessible to authorized reviewers. The identity of authors and their submission should only be disclosed to those who have a bona fide need to know as part of the review process; and reviews may only be disclosed by the authors receiving them in an anonymized form. This includes the uploading of confidential submissions, technical approaches described by authors in their submissions, or any information about the authors into any system managed by a third party, including LLMs, that does not promise to maintain the confidentiality of that information by reviewers, since the storage, indexing, learning, and utilization of such submissions may violate the author’s right to confidentiality.
- Confidentiality of Reviewers – The identity of reviewers may not be disclosed to anyone who does not have a bona fide need to know as part of the review process before, during, or after the peer review process has completed. Authors will make no attempt to identify or contact reviewers of their submissions.
- Conflicts of Interest and Ethical Behavior – Reviewers, authors, and decision makers all agree to adhere to the highest ethical standards for peer review. IJCAI requires that the peer review process and decisions must be unbiased, without influence from nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other demographic characteristics, or any personal or professional conflicts, ensuring a fair and honest evaluation and publication decision based on the quality, relevance, and/or importance of the submitted work. Furthermore, when authors submit their work to IJCAI, there is an implicit understanding that any information contained within the submission will not be utilized during the peer review process for any purpose other than evaluating, making recommendations to the author, and making publication decisions on the submission.
Reviewer Recognition – All reviewers and meta reviewers strictly adhering to the above principles and performing all their duties in a timely and responsible manner and actively participating in the discussions will be eligible for recognition from the proceeds of the PPI consisting of a partial or full waiver of the registration fee to the event they reviewed for.