COLING 2028 deadline
International Conference on Computational Linguistics
Not announced yet. The dates below are projected from COLING 2027 (same dates, one year on). They will update here when the call for papers is out.
Paper submission deadline
~11 months
- Anywhere on Earth
- ~Tue, Oct 12, 2027 · 23:59 AoE
- As published
- AoE
Key dates
Full paper
~Tue, Oct 12, 2027 · 23:59 AoE
What COLING reviewers will look for
COLING 2027 does not run its own reviewing: papers are reviewed in ACL Rolling Review and then committed to COLING, whose program chairs decide from the ARR reviews and meta-review. COLING 2027 (Macau, 9–14 May 2027) takes papers from the ARR October 2026 cycle (deadline 12 October 2026) or earlier, shared with NAACL 2027; at commitment (deadline 23 December 2026) authors pick one primary venue and may opt in to be considered by the other; notification 10 February 2027. ARR reviews are about half a page. From the October 2026 cycle ARR runs under ACL's sustainable-reviewing policy (a submission is guaranteed review only if it brings a qualified reviewer or chair; caps of 20 submissions per author); the reviewer guidelines themselves were last revised in May 2025 and an update is pending. The form separates objective Soundness (must be justified in the text) from subjective Excitement, and the Overall Assessment is an outcome recommendation (Award / Conference / Findings / Resubmit), all on 1–5 with half points. Weaknesses are a numbered list specific enough for an AC to follow; suggested extra work goes under Comments. The guidelines list lazy-reviewing heuristics to avoid, e.g. "not novel" without a reference, "not SOTA", "simple method", "only tested on English", "I would have done X", or listing limitations the authors already acknowledge.
- Overall score
- Overall Assessment, 1–5 (top: “Consider for Award”)
- Sub-scores
- Soundness, Excitement, Reproducibility, Datasets, Software (1–5)
- Written fields
- Paper Summary · Summary Of Strengths · Summary Of Weaknesses · Comments Suggestions And Typos · Best Paper Justification · Limitations And Societal Impact · Ethical Concerns · Needs Ethics Review
- Author checklist
- Responsible NLP Research Checklist, 18 items
Where the bar sits. COLING has not historically published a Findings volume; check the COLING 2027 call. In the Overall Assessment, 4 ("Conference") argues for the main conference and 3 ("Findings") for the Findings of the ACL volume, which the program chairs may offer to committed papers that are sound but less exciting. ARR publishes no cutoff; venue senior ACs decide. Rule of thumb: average Overall Assessment ≥ 3.5 → main conference plausible, 3.0–3.5 → Findings, < 3.0 → likely rejected. Main conference acceptance is about 20–25%, plus ~13–15% Findings.
LLM policy for reviewers
ACL's publication-ethics policy, which ARR applies, requires the reviewer to read the paper fully and write the content and argument of the review (and meta-review) themselves; generative assistance may not create the first draft, but may paraphrase the reviewer's own text or help check proofs. Neither the manuscript nor the review may be uploaded to a non-privacy-preserving generative tool, even for language editing. The live form asks reviewers to disclose AI-tool use (visible to authors), and reviewers who rely on generative models in violation of the policy can be banned from submitting to ACL venues.
Official policy