CVPR 2027 · pre-submission review
Get an AI review of your CVPR paper before you submit
Upload your draft PDF to reviewpaper.ai and choose CVPR. In a few minutes, three simulated reviewers each write a CVPR-style review: a summary, strengths, weaknesses, a Preliminary Recommendation from Reject to Strong Accept, and a justification with points for the rebuttal. An area chair writes the meta-review, and you get a predicted score range, a ranked list of fixes and a check against CVPR's author requirements. Every point links to the passage in your PDF. The first three reviews are free.
Last checked against official sources on .
CVPR hasn't published a 2027 reviewer form yet, so this is the 2026 form. We review CVPR 2027 papers against it until the new one is out, and update this page when it is.
What the CVPR review contains
Each of the three reviewers fills in the modeled CVPR 2026 review form, in the order CVPR reviewers see it, and writes in the venue's style. CVPR 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 |
| Preliminary Recommendation | Score, 1–5 |
| Justification For Recommendation And Suggestions For Rebuttal | Free text |
| Confidence Level | Score, 1–5 |
| Dataset Attribution | Free text |
| Ethics Flag | Free text |
Preliminary Recommendation, 1–5
- 5Strong Accept
- 4Weak Accept
- 3Borderline
- 2Weak Reject
- 1Reject
On top of the three reviews
- Area-chair meta-review with a recommendation: Award candidate, Oral, Highlight, Poster, Findings, 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.
- CVPR author requirements: 6 items checked against your paper.
- Evidence: every point links to the passage in your PDF; click it and the passage is highlighted.
The CVPR review form, field by field, with the official score wording
When it helps at CVPR
- Before the deadline. The weaknesses are what a reviewer will hold against the draft, such as a missing baseline, an ablation that doesn't isolate the contribution, or a claim the figures don't support. You see them while there is still time to fix them, ranked by impact.
- Desk-reject risks. The author-requirements check flags anonymity and formatting problems. Go through our CVPR submission checklist as well the day before you submit.
- After you submit. CVPR's rebuttal is a single page for all reviewers, so knowing the likely objections early tells you which experiment to run now. See the CVPR rebuttal guide.
- 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 CVPR report has the same parts in the CVPR 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 CVPR 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
Can I use it for the CVPR rebuttal?
Yes. Import the real reviews (paste them or upload the PDF) and you get a draft reply to every concern that quotes your paper. Then cut it to CVPR's one page; the CVPR rebuttal guide shows how to fit it.
What scores does a paper need at CVPR?
CVPR 2026 accepted about 25% of 16,092 submissions. No score statistics are public; on this 1–5 mapping, a mean of ≥ 3.5 (mostly Weak Accept or better) is a rough proxy for acceptance. The outlook in every report uses this bar.
How accurate is the predicted CVPR 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 CVPR review form you use official?
CVPR doesn't publish its review form, so ours is modeled: The CVPR review form is not public. Field order is reconstructed from the 2024–2025 OpenReview form; the five recommendation labels come from the 2026 reviewer training material, and the 1–5 numeric mapping is ours. The CVPR form page shows every field and the sources.
Am I allowed to run my own paper through an AI reviewer before submitting to CVPR?
Venue LLM rules are written for reviewers handling someone else's submission. CVPR's rule for reviewers: CVPR 2026 does not allow LLMs to be used to write reviews or meta-reviews, and no substantial paper or review content may be shared with an LLM. Violations can lead to desk rejection of the reviewer's own papers. 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 CVPR'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 CVPR reviewers' eyes
Upload a draft, the version under review or a rejected paper. Three reviewers fill in the CVPR 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 CVPR or its organizers. Rules change between cycles; the official pages above always win.