# Simulate ICLR reviews of your paper > Upload your paper PDF to reviewpaper.ai and choose ICLR. In a few minutes, three simulated reviewers each write an ICLR-style OpenReview review: a summary, Soundness, Presentation and Contribution scores (1–4), strengths, weaknesses, questions, and a rating on ICLR's 0–10 scale with a confidence level. An area chair writes the meta-review with an Accept (Oral), Accept (Poster) or Reject recommendation, and you get a predicted score range, a ranked fix list and a check of ICLR's author statements. Every point links to the passage in your PDF. The first three reviews are free. - Venue: International Conference on Learning Representations - Review form: modeled (the venue doesn't publish it), field by field at https://reviewpaper.ai/venues/iclr.md - Next ICLR deadline: ICLR 2028 abstract, ~Sat, Sep 18, 2027 · 23:59 AoE (estimated from last year): https://reviewpaper.ai/deadlines/iclr-2028.md - Web page: https://reviewpaper.ai/ai-review/iclr ## What the ICLR review contains Each of three simulated reviewers fills in the ICLR 2026 form, in this order: | Field | Type | |---|---| | Summary | free text | | Soundness | score, 1–4 | | Presentation | score, 1–4 | | Contribution | score, 1–4 | | Strengths | list of points | | Weaknesses | list of points | | Questions | list of points | | Flag For Ethics Review | single choice | | Rating | score, 0–10 | | Confidence | score, 1–5 | Rating scale: 10 = strong accept, should be highlighted at the conference, 8 = accept, good paper, 6 = marginally above the acceptance threshold, 4 = marginally below the acceptance threshold, 2 = reject, not good enough, 0 = strong reject. On top of the three reviews: - Area-chair meta-review with a recommendation (Accept (Oral), Accept (Poster), Reject) - Score outlook: an expected score range and a likely accept, borderline or likely reject call - Fix list: what to change before submitting, ranked by impact - ICLR author statements: 5 items checked against the paper - Every point linked to the passage in the PDF ## When it helps at ICLR - **Between submission and reviews.** ICLR reviews are public on OpenReview and reviewers can change their scores during the discussion. Simulated reviews show the likely objections before the real ones arrive, so the missing ablation is already running when the discussion opens. - **During the discussion.** You can revise the PDF while the discussion is open. Re-run the review on the revision to see which concerns still stand. See [the ICLR rebuttal guide](https://reviewpaper.ai/guides/iclr-rebuttal). - **Reading your scores.** What a 6/6/8 or a 4/6/6 has meant historically: the [ICLR acceptance odds](https://reviewpaper.ai/tools/iclr-acceptance-odds) tool, from public OpenReview decisions. - **Before the next deadline.** Drafting for the next ICLR, or reworking a rejected paper? Run the new version against the ICLR form, or the form of the venue you send it to next. ## Sample report https://reviewpaper.ai/sample: a full report on a published paper (ICLR form), no sign-up. ## FAQ ### Can it predict my ICLR rating? Each simulated reviewer gives a rating on ICLR's 0–10 scale, and the report gives an expected range with a likely accept, borderline or likely reject call. Treat it as a stress test. For the historical acceptance rate of a score profile you already have, use the [ICLR acceptance odds tool](https://reviewpaper.ai/tools/iclr-acceptance-odds). ### What scores does a paper need at ICLR? ICLR 2026 accepted 27.4% of decided submissions. Paper Copilot means: posters ≈ 5.4, orals ≈ 6.4, rejected ≈ 4.0. Rough rule: mean ≥ 5 likely accept, ~4.4–5 borderline. The outlook in every report uses this bar. ### How accurate is the predicted ICLR 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 ICLR review form you use official? ICLR doesn't publish its review form, so ours is modeled: ICLR's guide is public, but the OpenReview form itself is not. Field order follows the long-standing ICLR form and the 2026 rating labels (0/2/4/6/8/10) come from secondary sources. The [ICLR form page](https://reviewpaper.ai/venues/iclr) shows every field and the sources. ### Am I allowed to run my own paper through an AI reviewer before submitting to ICLR? Venue LLM rules are written for reviewers handling someone else's submission. ICLR's rule for reviewers: ICLR 2026 allows LLMs as general-purpose writing assistance, but reviewers are fully responsible for content and must disclose LLM use in the review form. Reviews were screened with LLM-text detectors. 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](https://reviewpaper.ai/guides/llm-policies-by-venue) 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](https://reviewpaper.ai/privacy). ### 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 ICLR'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](https://reviewpaper.ai/pricing). --- Simulate reviews of your own paper in this venue's form: https://reviewpaper.ai/new?venue=iclr (3 free reviews). Sample report: https://reviewpaper.ai/sample. reviewpaper.ai is for authors checking their own paper at any stage: a draft, a submission under review, or a rejected paper being reworked. If you are an assigned reviewer, follow your venue's LLM policy: most venues forbid putting a submission you are reviewing into any external AI tool. Not affiliated with any conference.