aaai-submission

AAAI Submission

Use this for an AAAI main technical track submission audit. Reopen the current conference page, Author Kit, CFP, submission instructions, review process page, supplementary-material page, and author policies before giving deadline-ready advice.

Submission audit

• Confirm the target track: Main Track, AI for Social Impact, AI Alignment, or another AAAI program. Track-specific rules can differ.
• Verify OpenReview account/profile readiness, conflicts, author list, subject areas, and submission metadata before the abstract and paper deadlines.
• Check the current AAAI author kit. AAAI-26 submissions used AAAI two-column camera-ready style, US Letter PDF, and 7 pages of technical content plus pages solely for references and the reproducibility checklist.
• Confirm double-blind compliance in the PDF, file names, references to prior work, supplement, code/data, and metadata. Omit acknowledgments in the review version.
• Include the reproducibility checklist after references when current instructions require it.
• Enforce the author submission limit and author-change rules. AAAI-26 limited each author to 10 combined technical-track submissions and did not allow authors to be added after submission.
• Check multiple-submission compliance. An AAAI submission under review cannot simultaneously be under review at another archival venue.
• Apply the current AAAI AI-use policy: editing/polishing author-written text may be allowed, but LLM-generated manuscript text, AI authorship, and AI-generated citations are policy risks.

Blocking risks

• Over-limit technical content or malformed PDF.
• Missing reproducibility checklist.
• Identity leakage in paper, supplement, links, code, data, or prior-work citations.
• Author added after the allowed window.
• Concurrent archival submission.
• Web pointers to mutable supplementary material.
• Policy-violating LLM-generated text, hallucinated references, or plagiarism.

Summary-reject screen

AAAI's large reviewer pool and high volume mean a desk-level or Phase-1 cut is the most likely way to lose, so screen for the mechanical failures first.

Check	Fast-fail trigger	Where it bites
Page limit	technical content over the cap	desk return
Anonymity	author name in PDF, code, or metadata	policy reject
Checklist	missing or contradictory	Phase-1 distrust
Dual submission	concurrent archival venue	ethics reject

Worked vignette

A robotics-learning team has 7 strong technical pages but left an acknowledgments line and a GitHub URL with their lab name in the supplement. The audit flags anonymity as the highest summary-reject risk: the fix order is strip the acknowledgment, replace the link with an anonymous archive, scrub ZIP metadata, then re-export and re-run the anonymity sweep before the paper deadline.

Output format

[AAAI readiness] Ready / Needs fixes / Not ready
[Track] Main / AI for Social Impact / AI Alignment / other
[Blocking checks] <page/anonymity/checklist/supplement/author-limit/dual-submission/AI-policy>
[Highest summary-reject risk] <one issue>
[Fix order] <ordered fixes before submission>