AAAI · pre-submission review
Get an AI review of your AAAI paper before you submit
Upload your draft PDF to reviewpaper.ai and choose AAAI. In a few minutes, three simulated reviewers each write an AAAI-style review: summary, strengths, weaknesses, questions for the authors, four criterion ratings (significance, justification of the approach, quality of evaluation, reproducibility) and the 1–8 Overall Evaluation with a confidence level. An area chair writes the meta-review, and you get a predicted score range, a ranked fix list and a check against the AAAI Reproducibility Checklist. Every point links to the passage in your PDF. The first three reviews are free.
Last checked against official sources on .
Submitted to AAAI 2027? Author response ends Oct 25, decisions Nov 30.
What the AAAI review contains
Each of the three reviewers fills in the modeled AAAI 2027 review form, in the order AAAI reviewers see it, and writes in the venue's style. AAAI doesn't publish its form, so ours is reconstructed from public sources.
| Field | Type |
|---|---|
| Summary | Free text |
| Strengths | List of points |
| Weaknesses | List of points |
| Questions For The Authors | List of points |
| Significance Of The Problem | Score, 1–4 |
| Justification Of Approach | Score, 1–4 |
| Quality Of Evaluation | Score, 1–4 |
| Reproducibility And Facilitation Of Follow Up Work | Score, 1–4 |
| Ethical Considerations | Free text |
| Overall Evaluation | Score, 1–8 |
| Confidence | Score, 1–5 |
Overall Evaluation, 1–8
- 8Strong accept (top 5% of accepted papers)
- 7Accept (top 15% of accepted papers)
- 6Weak accept
- 5Borderline accept
- 4Borderline reject
- 3Weak reject
- 2Reject
- 1Strong reject
On top of the three reviews
- Area-chair meta-review with a recommendation: Accept, Reject.
- Score outlook: an expected score range and a likely accept, borderline or likely reject call.
- Fix list: what to change before you submit, ranked by impact.
- AAAI Reproducibility Checklist: 7 items checked against your paper.
- Evidence: every point links to the passage in your PDF; click it and the passage is highlighted.
The AAAI review form, field by field, with the official score wording
When it helps at AAAI
- Before the deadline. AAAI reviews in two phases, and many papers are rejected after Phase 1, before any author feedback. The paper has to make its case on a first read; each simulated reviewer's summary shows whether your contribution comes through.
- Reproducibility. AAAI asks authors to fill in a reproducibility checklist. The check flags items the paper doesn't address.
- Coming from another venue. Reworking a NeurIPS or ICML rejection for AAAI? Run the revision against the AAAI form, which scores evaluation quality and reproducibility separately.
- When the real reviews land. Import them in the Rebuttal tab and get a draft reply to every concern, quoting your paper.
See a sample report first
The sample report is a real run on a published paper, no sign-up needed: three reviewers, the meta-review, the outlook and the fix list, with every point linked to the PDF. It uses the ICLR form; a AAAI report has the same parts in the AAAI form.
How it works
- Upload the PDF: a draft, the version under review or a rejected paper. The whole file is read, appendices included.
- Pick AAAI and a reviewer model: Standard, Deep or Max.
- Read the reviews a few minutes later. Click any point to jump to its passage, fix what matters, re-run, or ask the paper a question in the chat.
FAQ
When should I run it for AAAI?
Before the deadline. Because many AAAI papers are decided in Phase 1, before the author feedback stage, there may be no rebuttal in which to fix a misunderstanding. The weaknesses and questions in the simulated reviews are what to address in the paper itself.
What scores does a paper need at AAAI?
AAAI-26 accepted about 17.6% of 23,680 submissions still under review after compliance filtering (nearly 29,000 were submitted), and Phase 1 removes many papers before author feedback. AAAI-27 (Montréal, 16–23 February 2027) is in review: Phase-1 rejections went out 24 September 2026, author feedback runs 24–31 October and final decisions are due 30 November 2026. No public score statistics; rough rule: mean ≥ 5 (of 8) needed to be competitive. The outlook in every report uses this bar.
How accurate is the predicted AAAI score?
Treat it as a stress test, not a forecast. Real reviewers disagree a lot, and simulated ones can miss what a domain expert would catch or raise issues that aren't real. The value is in the specific criticisms, each linked to a passage, that you can fix before the deadline or answer in the rebuttal.
Is the AAAI review form you use official?
AAAI doesn't publish its review form, so ours is modeled: The AAAI review form is not public. The field list follows a published description of the AAAI-25 form and the AAAI-26 reviewer instructions (AAAI-27 has published its review process but no reviewer instructions yet); the four criterion labels (Excellent/Good/Fair/Poor) and the 1–8 overall labels are modeled on AAAI/IJCAI conventions, not official wording. The AAAI form page shows every field and the sources.
Am I allowed to run my own paper through an AI reviewer before submitting to AAAI?
Venue LLM rules are written for reviewers handling someone else's submission. AAAI's rule for reviewers: No explicit AAAI reviewer-LLM rule was found in the AAAI-27 call or review-process pages, but reviewer confidentiality rules in practice forbid uploading submissions to external LLMs. AAAI supplies its own official AI-generated supplementary review (no paper content is used for LLM training), and reviewers must not duplicate content from other reviews. Checking your own unpublished paper is your decision as the author, and nothing is shared with the venue. If you are an assigned reviewer, don't upload a paper you are reviewing. Our LLM policies guide lists every venue's rules with official links.
Who can see my paper? Does it break double-blind review?
Only you. The PDF is stored privately, served only to your signed-in account and never used to train models, so uploading a paper under double-blind review reveals nothing to reviewers, the venue or other users. Delete the paper and its file, reviews and chat are gone. Details in the privacy policy.
How is this different from asking ChatGPT to review my paper?
A general chatbot writes one review in whatever format you prompt for. reviewpaper.ai reads the whole PDF, appendices included, has three reviewer personas fill in AAAI's own form and score scales, adds an area-chair meta-review, a score outlook and a ranked fix list, and links every point to the passage it is about so you can check it in seconds.
My paper is already submitted. Is it still useful?
Yes. Reviews take weeks, so seeing the likely objections now gives you time to run the missing experiment before the author response. When the real reviews arrive, import them for a draft rebuttal. If the paper is rejected, run the revision against the next venue's form.
How much does it cost?
Your first three reviews are free, with no card. After that, Pro is $10 a month for 12 credits, or buy 5 credits for $5. A Standard review (Claude Sonnet 5.5) costs 1 credit; Deep (Claude Opus 5.5) costs 2 and Max (Claude Fable 5.1) 6. See pricing.
See your paper through AAAI reviewers' eyes
Upload a draft, the version under review or a rejected paper. Three reviewers fill in the AAAI form, an area chair writes the meta-review, and every point links to the passage it is about. Your first three runs are free.
Sources
reviewpaper.ai is not affiliated with AAAI or its organizers. Rules change between cycles; the official pages above always win.