AISTATS Review Process
Use this to reason about review-stage strategy. Reopen the current CFP, OpenReview group, author instructions, reviewer instructions if posted, and code of conduct before making process claims.
Process model
- AISTATS uses OpenReview for submission and review workflow in recent cycles.
- Reviewers evaluate technical correctness, statistical and machine-learning contribution, empirical support, clarity, reproducibility, and relevance to artificial intelligence and statistics.
- Author discussion is limited. AISTATS 2026 used a discussion period after initial reviews, with text-only author-reviewer discussion and no links.
- Reviewer and author obligations include confidentiality, appropriate conflicts, professional conduct, and respect for anonymity.
- The most useful response is a decision-focused clarification that gives the area chair or meta-reviewer a clean rationale for acceptance or rejection.
- Accepted papers are published in PMLR, so final metadata and camera-ready compliance matter as much as the initial acceptance.
Output format
text[Current stage] submitted / reviews / discussion / decision / camera-ready [Decision actors] <reviewers/meta-reviewer/chairs> [Likely leverage] <correctness/statistics/experiments/clarity/reproducibility> [Forbidden moves] <identity leak / external links if forbidden / new unsupported results> [Next response move] <one action>


