The author must make sure that the email address associated with the submission is added to their profile and confirmed.

A vulnerability is a defect (bug) in the system that compromises the integrity of the application or its data. If you found one, please Contact Us as soon as possible so that it can be fixed. Please do NOT post about the vulnerability elsewhere.

We understand the frustration, unfortunately, Google Scholar does not have an API that enables us to import author publications.

Individual conferences determine the policy on the visibility of withdrawn and desk-rejected submissions. Please refer to the conference website for further information on the policy, and contact the venue organizers with any questions or concerns.

The max file size for uploads is 100 MB.

To revert a withdrawal, please contact the Program Chairs of your conference using the contact email on the venue homepage.

You can report a bug or request a feature by going to our issue tracker repository. Before you do so, please read the guidelines so that we can understand and address your bug report or request. Once you are familiar with the procedure, you can make use of one of these templates to help us better understand your issue or feature request.

Due date is the advertised deadline.

Expiration date is the hard deadline.

For Authors

The timeline for submission withdrawals is determined by the Program Chairs of each venue. Therefore, there is not a single overarching OpenReview withdrawal policy. If you have questions about when in a venue workflow you will be able to withdraw your submission, you should reach out to the Program Chairs of that venue directly.

For Program Chairs

Authors are able to withdraw their paper at any time after the submission deadline or after has been run. You can optionally restrict the withdrawal window from your . You can also use the venue request form to configure the visibility of withdrawn and desk-rejected papers, as well as the identities of their authors.

After your venue is deployed, add Program Chair(s) by going to your Venue Request form, clicking the Revision button, then adding the emails of the additional program chair(s) to the Program Chair Emails field of the form. The user will need to have an active OpenReview profile with this email confirmed in order to access the venue.

The OpenReview Documentation is divided into 4 main sections:

• : Contains the FAQ, how to create a Venue, how to create a profile, and how to interact with the API.

• : An overview of a typical conference workflow with step by step instructions for configuring each stage of your venue.

• : Mainly for Venue organizers that want to setup different parts of the workflow.

Reviewers will see their assigned papers in their Reviewer console and in their Task list. Depending on what method you used to assign Reviewers to papers, they may have already been notified of their assignments:

Automatic Assignment Deployed through the Edge Browser

If you deployed an assignment configuration from the edge browser, Reviewers would not have received a notification of their assignments.

If you have lost access to your OpenReview account, please try the following steps.

1. Try resetting your password with alternate email accounts. You can reset your password with any email that was associated with it.

2. Contact OpenReview Support ([email protected]) from your new email with the following information: your old email or profile ID and any available documentation verifying your institutional history in order to gain assistance in resetting your password.

1. Introduction

This guide is for venue organizers using the new workflow configuration UI in OpenReview. This guide will walk through an overview of how to best interact with the UI.

2. Accessing the Workflow Console

Once your venue is created and you're assigned as a Program Chair, navigate to the console by: Program Chairs Console → Workflow Setup Timeline

This brings you to the Workflow Setup Timeline tab, where you can:

• View user groups (reviewers, authors, chairs)

• Configure review stages (bidding, assignments, reviews, decisions)

• Set email notifications and visibility options

• Automate release of submissions, reviews, and decisions

3. Understanding the UI Structure

3.1 Workflow Groups

This section let's you view the members of major group in the venue.

• Program Chairs – oversee all configurations and decisions

• Reviewers – assigned to review submissions (also used for recruiting reviewers)

• Authors – those submitting papers

• Automated Administrator – used for auto-execution of stages like conflict detection

3.2 Program Chair Configuration Tasks

This section includes tasks to help guide the Program Chair through configuring major steps of the venue. Clicking on each task will take you to the relevant section of the workflow.

3.3 Workflow Configurations

This section contains a chronological list of stages in the submission and review pipeline. Each row shows:

• A stage title (e.g., “Create Reviewers Conflict”)

• An invitation label showing who can access it

• The Enable / Disable toggle

• Execution status (e.g., Executed, Scheduled, Expired)

4. How to Edit a Workflow Stage

You can customize each stage via its configuration form.

1. Locate the stage in the Workflow Configurations list.

2. If not yet active, click Enable.

3. Click the stage title (e.g., “Create Author Decision Notification”).

4. In the configuration form you use the Edit button to change settings such as:

Notes:

• Read the description of each invitation and field to understand how it works in the workflow.

• Re-execution of stages like “Create Reviewers Affinity Score” may overwrite existing data.

• When editing forms, use the 'Preview' tab to see what the form will look like.

5. Key Workflow Stages Overview

Submissions

• Submission: Opens the form for authors to submit papers. This invitation is time-bound and should end before reviewer assignment begins.

• Withdrawal: Enables authors to withdraw papers.

• Desk Rejection: Allows chairs to reject papers prior to review.

Reviewer Assignment

• Reviewers Bid: Enables reviewers to bid for reviewing specific papers.

• Create Reviewers Conflict: Detects institutional or co-authorship conflicts.

• Create Reviewers Affinity Score: Computes expertise match scores using OpenReview's models.

• Create Reviewers Submission Group: Creates a reviewer group for each paper. These groups record which reviewers are assigned to a submission, and need to be created before assignment begins.

Review Stage

• Create Author Reviews Notification: Defines and sends notification emails to authors when reviews are ready.

• Replies to Submissions

  • Official Review: Launches the review form reviewers must fill out.

  • Official Comment: Allows for comments to be made on the submission

Decision Stage

• Create Decision Upload: Upload final decisions in batch (e.g., from a CSV).

• Create Author Decision Notification: Customize notification email content for decisions.

• Decision Release: Specifies the release time and visibility settings for decisions.

Final Submissions

• Camera Ready Revision: Opens the form for accepted papers to be revised for camera-ready versions.

• Create Submission Release: Controls which submissions are made public and under what license.

6. Customization Tips

• Review and customize all stages prior to starting your venue - stages can now be scheduled to release ahead of time.

• Automated stages (e.g., affinity score, conflict detection) are executed by the Automated Administrator group.

The best way to get help with a specific issue is to contact the program chairs or organizers of the venue you are participating in. Contact info can usually be found on the venue's OpenReview page.

For general inquiries, you can contact the OpenReview team by using the . We are most responsive from 9AM - 5PM EST Monday through Friday. With the exception of urgent issues, requests made on weekends or US holidays can expect to receive a response on the next business day.

Ensure that you are logged in with an active OpenReview account that has the email the invitation was sent to added and confirmed to it. To make an OpenReview account, see . To add an email to your account, see .

If you are logged in and are still not able to see your assigned submissions (but can see assignments under your Tasks), then reviewers have likely not been given reader access for submissions by the organizers of the venue.

Please contact the venue organizers notifying them of the issue. The contact email can be found on the homepage of the venue.

Missing Fields

If part of the submission is missing fields such as the PDF, the most likely causes are:

If you removed the rating or confidence fields from your Official Review form, the PC console will show an average rating and/or confidence of 0 for each paper. If you replaced them with custom values, you can customize your PC console to show the average of those values instead.

1. From your venue request form, click .

2. Select which field you want to be used in place of rating and/or confidence. It must be in the "Additional Review Form Options" field. The options reviewers can select for that field must follow the format "number: description", for example "1: Very Poor".

All submissions must be represented and submitted by human authors. There are no author profiles representing AI.

A field should be added to the submission form to indicate the content was generated by an LLM. Please see our guide on how to customize the forms.

Forms are rendered in the UI using invitations. You can read more about invitations in the link below.

API V2 Invitations

The OpenReview system uses the reviewer's publications from Expertise Selection in order to match reviewers and papers via affinity scores. Reviewers who do not have existing publications should leave the Expertise Selection form blank, and the reviewer will not be assigned an affinity score for a paper.

Decisions on how to assign reviewers without affinity scores is at the discretion of the venue organizers. Please contact the venue organizers if you have further questions about how review assignment will work for a specific venue.

Note: There is no 'Submit' button for Expertise Selection, and the task will show in your pending queue (where you can make changes) until the task expires at which time the task will automatically leave the queue.

See also: How do I complete my tasks?

There are two ways you can set an abstract registration deadline:

1. When you submit your Support Request Form

2. After your venue request form has been submitted, add an Abstract Registration deadline using the 'Revision' button on your venue request form.

Until the Abstract Registration deadline, authors will have the option to modify their submissions using the ‘edit’ button in the top right corner of their submission forum page.

After the Abstract Registration deadline passes, you will need to run the 'Post Submission Stage' from your venue request form. This creates the 'Revision' button and paper groups, which allow authors to access and edit their submissions. It also creates blinded copies to anonymize submissions, if applicable.

If you change the Submission deadline after the Abstract Registration deadline, you will need to re-run the ‘Post Submission Stage’ in order to update the revision deadline. After the Submission deadline, authors will lose the ability to revise their submissions.

There are currently two APIs supported. The current API (referred to in the documentation as API or API 2) is the current API version, and is the default version used for all operations unless otherwise specified.

The legacy API v1 is being phased out, but is still used for some conferences (primarily those before 2024)

While most operations will work on both APIs, pay careful attention when that is not the case, for example, the JSON format for each API is different.

We've received many emails from concerned researchers who want to sign up quickly but aren't affiliated with an academic institution.

If you are not affiliated with an academic institution, but are employed at a company, you can use that domain and position information to sign up. You may need to request OpenReview add your company as an institutional domain.

If you do not have a company domain, you can use a personal email. All personal emails will be moderated - see Expediting Profile Activation for additional tips on how to make sure your profile is activated as quickly as possible.

When filling out the profile details for registration, there is a section that will ask for your Education and Career History, which will require a current position. For the role you can type “Independent Researcher” and set that as your current position and type in a domain. See the page Entering Institutional Data for an example of how to fill out institutional information as an independent researcher. Please include as much of your background as possible. If the "Education and Career History" section only lists "Independent Researcher" we will ask you to add another institution record.

Please do not use an old role or affiliation as your current position, as that may delay moderation.

Publication date(pdate) means when the venue marked the paper as accepted.

Modification date(mdate) means when the last time the paper was modified.

The odate means when the submission becomes public. To check the odate of a submission, see the note object https://api2.openreview.net/notes?id=

To find the id you can check the url of the submission, for example https://openreview.net/forum?id=KS8mIvetg2 . Use id=KS8mIvetg2 , the note object url will be https://api2.openreview.net/notes?id=KS8mIvetg2.

OpenReview requires every publication to have a license. If you have a paper that is under a license that is not listed, please contact us through the Feedback Form.

There are a few different ways to find your venue id.

1. If you are a Program Chair, go to your venue request form and copy the information in the field Venue ID

2. Use the URL of the submission page. The venue id is the portion of the url after group?id:For example for ICLR 2024 the submission homepage is : https://openreview.net/group?id=ICLR.cc/2024/Conference#tab-accept-oral, and the venue id is ICLR.cc/2024/Conference

To recruit reviewers, there is a feature located on the venue request form called "Recruitment", clicking this button will allow you to send emails to potential reviewers. To find more information, please see our documentation on Reviewer Recruitment and Reminders.

Sent: The initial status value, meaning the message was sent to the email service.

Dropped: The email was not sent to the recipient for delivery.

Deferred: The email cannot immediately be delivered, but has not been completely rejected. The service will continue to try for 72 hours to deliver the deferred message. After 72 hours the defferal turns into a block.

Bounce: The server cannot or will not deliver the message. This is often caused by outdated or an invalid email address.

Delivered: The email has been accepted by the receiving server. This does not mean that the email made it to the recipient's inbox.

Blocked: The email was denied temporarily by the server. This is unrelated to the validity of the address.

Your OpenReview profile ID is a unique string made up of a tilde concatenated with your full name and a number, for example ∼First_Last1. If you go to your OpenReview profile, your ID will be at the end of the url (for example, https://openreview.net/profile?id=∼Your_Id1)

Each venue decides its own policy for how to handle requests to change the authorship list, order, or author details after the deadline. This is sometimes listed on the venue website or FAQ. If you need to request a change to your submission after the submission deadline has passed, please contact the venue organizers.

1. Request a Venue

To host a venue on OpenReview—such as a conference, workshop, or symposium—you must first submit a request via the OpenReview Support Request Form. This form is used to collect basic information about your venue and define the initial configuration of your review workflow.

Steps:

1. Go to the Venue Request Page:

   Visit .

2. Open the Request Form:

   Select the "Conference Review Workflow" form under the Venue Configuration Requests tab.

3. Fill in the Required Details

2. Complete Workflow Configuration Tasks

After your venue is created, the Program Chairs are responsible for configuring key stages of the peer review workflow. These tasks are listed in the Workflow Console under “Program Chairs Configuration Tasks” along with their respective deadlines.

Each tasks appears as a clickable item in the configuration panel. Once opened, they present a web form where settings can be customized and saved.

3. Review and Configure Workflow Steps

Once the Workflow Configuration Tasks are complete, also review and make any necessary changes to the steps of the workflow. Some stages will run automatically once their activation date passes, so we recommend configuring the stages as early as possible.

4. Recruitment

Reviewer recruitment in OpenReview is handled through the Reviewers Recruitment workflow stage. This task enables Program Chairs to invite users to participate in the review process—typically as reviewers, but potentially also for other roles like area chairs or senior area chairs, depending on the venue setup.

How to Recruit:

1. Go to the Reviewers Group in the Workflow Group console

2. Click the Recruitment Request button and fill out the Recruitment Form, including users to be invited, and the recruitment template.

3. Submit changes

   Once submitted, OpenReview will send personalized email invitations containing links where recipients can accept or decline.

Notes:

• Recruitment can be done at any time, but it's ideal to complete it well before the review stage begins.

• Recruitment is independent from assignment matching. Reviewers can be invited first, and matching is performed later once enough reviewers have accepted and submissions are in.

• The Recruitment page can also be used to send recruitment reminders, which will send an email to any users that have not already responded to the invitation

5. Assignment

Once recruitment is complete and submissions are in, Program Chairs can assign reviewers to papers using the Create/Deploy Reviewer Assignment task in the Program Chairs Console.

Assignments are not configured automatically, and must be created by the program chairs.

How to Assign Reviewers:

1. Make sure that Reviewers Conflict and Reviewers Affinity Score have been calculated

2. Open the Assignment Tool Click on “Create Reviewer Assignment” in the workflow tasks list. This page contains:

   • A link to create draft assignments

Notes:

• Matching is done after recruitment but before the review stage opens.

• Errors during deployment (as seen in the UI) should be resolved by checking that:

  • The draft match exists and is selected.

  • Reviewer groups are correctly populated.

6. Monitor Venue

After assignments are made, the rest of the conference workflow will run according to the settings and dates in the conference workflow. Monitor these stages and change them as necessary throughout the rest of the venue workflow.

There are a few common reasons why you might not have received the password reset email. You can try the following steps to debug the issue

1. Check that the email was not sent to a spam or junk folder.

2. Try sending the password reset email again and double check that there are no typos in the email.

3. Reset your password using a different email that is listed in your profile (such as personal email, previous institutional email).

If after these steps, you are still having trouble resetting your password, contact us through the .

You can try the following steps to debug issues related to adding your DBLP link to your profile:

1. Ensure that the DBLP link is properly formatted and uses the persistent URL (see for more details about persistent URLs)

OpenReview’s goal is to provide scientific communication to the entire global community. Initially OpenReview was not available to users in Iran, Cuba, Syria, and several other countries because our cloud service provider blocked access as a simple approach to comply with United States economic sanctions and trade laws.

Recently the OpenReview staff has done extra work to make OpenReview available in all countries, including those above. In order to comply with relevant laws, OpenReview must guarantee that none of our registered users appear in the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury (OFAC) . We primarily accomplish this by looking for first-last-name matches in the list. When there is a name match, we ask for additional information that would disambiguate the OpenReview user from the person on the SDN list.

If you were notified that your profile has been limited, this means that the name on your profile matches that of a person on the SDN list. While in a limited state, you can log in to OpenReview, edit your profile, and view the same amount of data as before, but you will be unable to author any notes on the OpenReview system. This means you will be prevented from performing most common actions, including submitting to venues or posting reviews, meta-reviews, or comments. In order to reactivate your profile, you will need to do the following:

In order for a reviewer to see their assigned submissions, they need to be logged into an OpenReview account that has read permissions for the submission.

If a specific reviewer cannot access their assigned submission, they may need to check that the email they received the invitation to is added and confirmed to their account- The email should be listed in their profile with (Confirmed) next to it. If this is not the case, they should follow the steps to to their account.

If all reviewers cannot access the forum page of their assigned submission, check that they are readers of the submission they are assigned to. On the , make sure that the Submission Readers field includes reviewers. If reviewers are not listed as a reader, update the stage to add them as readers for their submissions.

Users can keep multiple names in their profiles and select one as preferred, which will be used for author submission and identity display. Names can be replaced by new names in the profile and in some submissions as long as the organizers of the venue allow it.

Adding a name to your profile and mark it as preferred

1. Go to your profile page at https://openreview.net/profile

Throughout the course of a conference/workshop, members of the committee groups are assigned tasks to complete, such as, Expertise Selection, Reviewing, and the Reviewer License Agreement. Users can find their tasks by clicking on the Tasks button (openreview.net/tasks) on the red nav bar at the top of the page. They can also find these tasks in their respective venue consoles.

They'll see a list of different venue IDs and the number of pending and completed tasks.

To view the tasks, click on the arrow next to the venue ID or "Show pending tasks and completed tasks". Clicking on a task link will redirect the user to another page to complete the task. When the task is completed it will be grayed out on the Tasks page. When the expiration date for that task expires the task will disappear from the Tasks page.

Note: Some tasks, such as Expertise Selection, will continue to show as pending until the task expires, at which time it will be removed from the queue.

See also:

To add institutional data to your OpenReview profile, go to your profile page at and click 'Edit profile'. You must enter at least one position under 'Education & Career History' for your profile to be saved.

Each position requires at least the following information: Position, Start date, Institution Info (domain, name, and country).

For the Position field, you can choose a position from the dropdown or, if none of the existing positions are a good fit, you may type in a custom role. Make sure to click in the custom role as it appear in the dropdown in order to select it for that field, otherwise no value will be entered.

Similarly for the institution name and domain, choose from the dropdown or type the name and domain yourself. If you are not sure what domain to type in for your institution, use the email domain used in institutional emails.

Participants signing up for an OpenReview profile will notice a with a email domain that is public (ex, gmail.com, 163.com, qq.com, etc.) or if the domain is not included in our institution list. The warning states that signing up with a public domain may spend up to 2 weeks in moderation. This warning has understandably triggered a large number of emails sent to the support address requesting an early activation. We see these emails, we may not answer each depending on the load, but we review moderation daily.

The warning was added by the staff in response to an increase in the number of fake/spam profiles being submitted with public domains, delaying moderation.

We encourage users to signup with their institutional (industry/government/university/research org) email domains to bypass moderation. "Institutional" in this case is defined as an established organization or corporation. If your domain is not recognized, please contact us through the feedback form shared in the signup page warning to add your domain to our list.

This is not something that is generated by OpenReview. Please contact the organizers of the venue where you served as a reviewer to see if they can assist you.

To see a history of all emails sent to you by the organizers, please login and go to openreview.net/messages. To see your recent activity, including any reviews you may have submitted, you can go to openreview.net/activity.

There is also the option of you've written with their corresponding submissions using the API.

The expiration date of an activation link is listed in the activation email. If you need to access the link again to complete your profile registration, confirm an email or update a pending profile, you can request another activation link by going to entering your email and click the ‘Didn’t receive confirmation email?’ button.

If you want to change your submission deadline, you can do so using the button on the . Note that you can only have one submission deadline for all submissions, and it is not possible to have different deadlines for different types of papers, or to extend the deadline only for a subset of authors.

If you used an abstract registration deadline and want to change the submission deadline after the abstract deadline has passed, you will need to rerun the Post Submission stage after changing the Submission Deadline.

If one or more publications are not present in your DBLP homepage, you can use our direct upload feature to manually upload your missing publications. Please go to the and follow the instructions there.

Once decisions have been posted, you will see a button on the request form for your venue. Once you click on this button, you will be able to specify the name of each tab you want to include in the homepage in the form of a dictionary.

Note that each key must be a valid decision option. For example, a venue with the decision options Accept (Oral), Accept (Spotlight), Accept (Poster) and Reject could choose to hide the rejected papers tab as follows:

If your venue will be using publication chairs, there is an option for PCs to set up this group in the request form.

PCs have the option to add the emails of the Publication Chairs while filling out the request or they can .

After the venue workflow has concluded and the PCs have run the , the Publication Chairs can access their console where they will be able to view all the Accepted submissions.

All exercises should be practiced on the dev site. For any exercise, you will need to have the following prerequisites set up.

1. Review the documentation and create a venue request for the dev site.

2. Instantiate the python client using your dev profile credentials:

1. Recommended: Familiarize yourself with the

Although OpenReview can support multiple groups for each role, it cannot support distinct workflows, different deadlines, or different review forms for multiple groups within the same venue.

1. to request the ability to support multiple groups for a particular role.

2. After we have customized your venue to support multiple groups, you can recruit members directly into each group with the 'Recruitment' button.

As the venue organizer, you can choose to hide specific submission fields from all submission readers. When a field is hidden, it becomes visible only to the Program Chairs and to the paper authors.

Hide a field using Post Submission

If you want to restrict a submission's field visibility from everyone except the Program Chairs and the paper authors, you can do as follows:

1. From your venue request form, click Post Submission.

2. Under hide_fields, select from the dropdown all the fields you would like to hide.

After the submission deadline, submissions will be updated to be visible to all users selected under submission_readers in the request form, and all fields selected under hide_fields will be visible only to Program Chairs and paper authors.

On the request form for your venue, click on the ‘Recruitment’ button to recruit reviewers (and ACs/SACs if applicable). You can use the 'Remind Recruitment' button to send a reminder to Reviewers who have not yet accepted or declined your invitation.

Make sure to pay close attention to the Invitee Details on the Recruitment form. Invitees must be formatted in a specific way to send the messages otherwise the messages will fail to send and will return a status error.

Enter a list of invitees with one user per line. Either tilde IDs (∼Captain_America1), emails ([email protected]), or email, name pairs ([email protected], Captain America) expected. If only an email address is provided for an invitee, the recruitment email is addressed to "Dear invitee". Do not use parentheses in your list of invitees.

• All invited reviewers will appear in the group venue_id/Reviewers/Invited

• Reviewers who accept the invitation will be added to the group venue_id/Reviewers

• Reviewers who decline the invitation will be added to the group venue_id/Reviewers_Declined.

You can find links to these groups on your PC console.

You can add supplementary material to the submission form by clicking on the 'Revision' button and adding the following JSON under Additional Submission Options:

{
    "supplementary_material": {
        "value": {
            "param": {
                "type": "file",
                "extensions": ["zip", "pdf"],
                "maxSize": 50,
                "optional": true,
                "deletable": true
            }
        },
        "description": "All supplementary material must be self-contained and zipped into a single file. Note that supplementary material will be visible to reviewers and the public throughout and after the review period, and ensure all material is anonymized. The maximum file size is 100MB.",
        "order": 7,
        "readers": [ 
            "ICML.cc/2023/Conference", 
            "ICML.cc/2023/Conference/Submission${4/number}/Senior_Area_Chairs", 
            "ICML.cc/2023/Conference/Submission${4/number}/Area_Chairs", 
            "ICML.cc/2023/Conference/Submission${4/number}/Authors"
        ]
    }
}

The field readers is optional and it can be used to restrict the readers of the field, if you don't specify the readers then all the readers of the submission will be able to see the supplementary material. Make sure you use the right group ids to specify the readers.

This will add a supplementary material field to upload zipped files of size up to 50 MB. You can also enable a Submission Revision Stage to allow a separate deadline for Supplementary Material.

If your venue is using the API 1 (api_version = "1") then you should use the following JSON example:

{
  "supplementary_material": {
    "description": "Supplementary material (e.g. code or video). All supplementary material must be self-contained and zipped into a single file.",
    "order": 10,
    "value-file": {
        "fileTypes": [
            "zip"
        ],
        "size": 50
    },
    "required": false
  }
}

See also:

• Technical Reference for Invitations

• How to Guides:

  • Change Submission Expiration Date

In OpenReview, invitations define the rules and permissions for creating or editing entities such as , , and edges. They act as templates that control who can perform specific actions, what content is expected, and how submissions are processed.

The vast majority of invitations will be created automatically at the appropriate point of the workflow, and you will interact with invitations via the UI and stages within to change settings.

Structure of Invitations

See the for a detailed description of each field of the invitation. The main fields that you will interact with are:

• id: A unique identifier (e.g., ICLR.cc/2025/Conference/-/Area_Chair_Registration)

• invitees: Who is allowed to use the invitation (e.g. Area Chairs)

• signatures: Who issued the invitation (typically a venue or program chair group)

Creating Invitations

The vast majority of invitations will be created automatically at the appropriate point of the workflow, and you will interact with invitations via the UI and stages within to change settings.

In some cases, you may need to create custom invitations to accommodate less commons workflow. In this case, see guidance for those specific stages, or the Custom Stage.

Editing invitations

1. Pre-created invitations: The vast majority of edits to invitations are made via the . To maintain consistency across the venue, the values in the venue configuration will overwrite any changes made directly to invitations. Examples: ,

2. Custom Invitations: For custom invitations that are not configurable in the venue configuration form, you may need to make changes directly to those invitations. In those cases, changes can be made in the Invitation's page, found on your venue's group page: http://openreview.net/group/edit?id={venue_id}

3. Changes to per-paper invitations: If you need to make programmatic changes to per-paper invitations for many submissions, you may want to make these changes programmatically.

Deleting invitations

Rather than outright deleting invitations, we use the expiration date. Update the exp_date field of the invitation to now or a past time (in ms time), which will stop any new posts from being made with the invitations. Example: .

These instructions are for those who would like to use OpenReview to host a conference, workshop, class project, symposium, or other event. If you are a journal hoping to use OpenReview, please email [email protected].

Submitting a Venue Request Form

Submitting a venue request form is the first step towards hosting a venue on OpenReview. Go to https://openreview.net/group?id=OpenReview.net/Support and click 'OpenReview Support Request Form'.

This is where you will select many of the settings for your venue such as general information about the venue, the committee roles, submission visibility, deadlines, etc.

For example, some venues have an abstract and a full paper deadline while others just have a full paper deadline. This can be specified in the form. Venue organizers can also decide if they want to force all the authors of the submission to have a profile or if they can enter the name/email address. The default setting is that the submission force accepts both options. Usually venue organizers give the authors 24 hours after the deadline to sign up before the submission is desk rejected.

The settings for readership permissions can be overwritten at later stages. If you initially make submissions private, you override the submission readers later on with or with .

Deployment

After you submit the form, our team will review it, ask for necessary modifications and deploy it; making your venue live. The deployment process does the following:

• Creates a venueid of the form AAAI.org/2025/Conference.

• Creates a home page for the venue located at https://openreview.net/group?id=[venueid]. This page contains the general information about the venue and the submission button.

• Creates the submission invitation open to any logged in user.

• Creates the committee groups and author groups with their respective consoles. The default committee group

You can then edit some of your selected settings from the venue request form. Note that if you do not enter a submission start date, submissions will open immediately upon venue deployment.

If you are following a journal-like workflow like TMLR, please .

After your venue is deployed, you will have access to multiple pages in OpenReview. These can be accessed through two methods:

1. Navigating to them from the Program Chair Console on the OpenReview website

2. Clicking the relevant link in the venue deployment confirmation email (subject: 'Your Venue is Deployed")

Venue Homepage

This is the public-facing page for your venue, and can be found under 'Active Venues' on the OpenReview homepage.

Program Chair Console

You can find a link to your PC console under ‘Active Consoles’ on the OpenReview homepage after you have logged into your account. Use this page to access your venue request form, committee consoles, and edge browser.

Venue Request Form

The venue request form contains the settings that were selected in your venue’s request form. You can get to the venue request form using the ‘Full venue configuration’ link at the bottom of your PC console. Almost all customizations, such as adding a Program Chair, review form modifications, deadline changes and workflow stages, should be made through the venue request form.

Edge Browser

The edge browser is the place where PCs can see reviewers, papers, and the links between them. This is where PCs will typically go to see and modify assignments for roles like reviewers and area chairs. To see the edge browser, you will first need to run the workflow stage, then you will see the link to '[Role] Assignment' in your PC Console under the 'Timeline' section. Use that link to access the Edge Browser.

Committee Member Groups and Consoles

Each type of committee member (Reviewers, Area Chairs, and Senior Area Chairs) for your venue will have their own console. You can access these consoles through each of the links under ‘Venue Roles’ at the bottom of your PC console. This link will take you to the group edit page, then you can use the 'View Group' button to see the console.

Live chat is a new OpenReview feature available to all venues to support synchronous dialog among reviewers and ACs. Similar to a Slack channel or chat room, messages will be visible to all participants and appear in real time as they are posted. In addition, there is an option to enable browser notifications so participants can be alerted when new messages are posted.

This feature was developed with encouragement and funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. For more information, see the Motivations section below.

Enabling Live Chat

Program Chairs can enable this feature from the venue management forum using a Comment Stage. First, click the Comment Stage button, then select the option "Enable Chat Between Committee Members". Members of the committee must be selected as participants.

Similarly, live chat can be disabled for all forum pages by clicking Comment Stage and selecting the disable chat option.

Once enabled, the live chat interface will be visible on all forum pages under the “Committee Members Chat” tab. Chat messages are hidden in the “Discussion” tab to prevent confusion and keep the discussions with paper authors and other users separate.

Chat Features

• Real-time: Type a simple message, and it appears immediately to other reviewers who have the same OpenReview forum page open in their browser, enabling interactive discussion.

• Private: By default, messages are visible all program chairs, area chairs, and reviewers of a paper. The messages will never be visible to the authors or the public. As an extra reminder, the chat participants are below the text input box. The ability to send private messages to a subset of the chat participants is planned for a future release.

• Rich text: Chat messages can use Markdown for formatting and LaTeX for math notation. When composing a message you can preview how it will look by clicking the Preview button. To copy the unformatted text of a posted chat message, hover over the message and click the View Raw button.

Motivation

In the past, many peer-reviewed yearly conferences in computer science (such as NeurIPS and CVPR) held an in-person meeting among the 20-30 “area chairs” of the conference to discuss and debate each paper. These meetings enabled extensive synchronous communication and serendipitous discussion during the final decision-making phase of the peer review process.

Unfortunately, these practices of in-person area-chair meetings are increasingly rare due to growing conference size, travel expenses, and (more recently) risks from the pandemic. Given the current universal use of web tools for reviewing, one would hope that the scientific communities would take advantage of internet technology to greatly increase interactivity during the peer review process, but unfortunately, reviewing workflows remain largely unchanged.

One exception is the introduction of “rebuttal statements” (an opportunity for authors to write a response to first drafts of the reviews), and asynchronous messages among the reviewing team. However, due to the lack of synchronous communication, discussion of these rebuttals (and scientific debate among the decision-making team) is hampered – often lackluster or incomplete.

Synchronous communication creates beneficial social pressure for engagement and the opportunity for interactive clarification without the extensive “context switching” inherent in asynchronously juggling many tasks. One highly experienced computer science reviewer and OpenReview user told us, “The burden of context switching after 24 hours away from a conversation can sometimes be the bottleneck in writing a response; re-remembering the details of a paper often takes even more time than writing a reply to a co-reviewer. Synchronous communication could dramatically reduce the burden and increase quality of reviewing by removing this context-switching bottleneck.”

While reviewers may naturally find each other online at the same time, and benefit from the chat feature, scheduled chat discussion sessions may be even more helpful. Scheduling synchronous sessions will be one key aspect of recapturing the benefits of in-person synchronous discussion. The details and cultural considerations of this scheduling will be driven by the program chairs. The in-person meetings were a burden, but also provided a scientific/social occasion that was enjoyed and cherished; we anticipate that with some sensitive design, program chairs can provide a similar occasion. The burden can be reduced by culling from the process submissions that are clear rejections.

Why text messaging rather than audio/video? Although speaking is easy, typing has multiple advantages: typed messages can be more easily archived, read later, skimmed quickly, analyzed, and studied. Many people are used to interactive synchronous text chat tools, such as Slack, and find them very productive. Furthermore, text has high accessibility, and is recommended by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.0). With text entry, users can naturally make some statements publicly and mark others as private; scientists are already used to this ability in typed chat systems such as Slack or Zoom. Typed chat messages support not only fully-synchronous interaction, but also interactive semi-synchronous interaction (e.g. with two minute interruption or delay), which fits modern work styles. If some users are slow typists, they can use voice recognition on their devices to type messages at speaking speed.

Submitting a Request

Venues using OpenReview that are "Full ARR" or "Hybrid" now follow the same workflow. Organizers should submit a venue request form and inform the OpenReview staff that they subscribe to ARR.

Full ARR venues: this commitment forum is the only venue to be created.

Hybrid venues: submit two venue request forms, one for non-ARR reviewing and another for commitment of ARR-reviews papers.

Venue Management

Once the commitment venue is deployed, there will be a field present in the submission form named "paper_link" for authors to commit their ARR processed papers. Here authors will simply provide the URL to the OpenReview forum of their ARR submission. This field is validated, so it will check whether the forum link exists in an ARR venue before allowing the author to submit.

Requesting ARR Reviews

Please when the submission deadline has passed and you're ready to begin the reviewing process. By default we provide readership permissions for the ARR submission forum, Official Reviews, and Meta Reviews. Please indicate whether you want us to include author responses to the official reviews.

OpenReview will provide read access to ARR forums of committed papers to the venue (assigned ACs and PCs) or import ARR reviews into the venue's OpenReview instance depending on the API used for the original ARR submission.

ARR API 1 cycles: After the ARR notes are imported, PCs and ACs will see a new field in the submission forum titled "Migrated Link, click this link to access the imported ARR notes.

ARR API 2 cycles: After read access has been granted, PCs and ACs should click on the "Paper Link" to access the previous ARR forum.

Setup:

1. Complete Prerequisites

Part 1: Getting all profiles from a list

1. Create a list of profiles to query

First, create a list of profiles to query. This could be a custom list, all authors of the submissions, all members of a group, such as reviewers, etc. This should be a list of profile IDs or emails that are associated with profiles.

Some useful examples from the documentation:

Check your work: Print the list of profiles. You should see a list of profiles in the format ['~First_Last1'....] or ['[email protected]',.....]

2. Get all profiles from that list

Review the example to get profiles from a list. This will return a list of profile objects. The relevant code is:

Check your work: The result should be a dictionary with the query profile ID and the OpenReview Profile Object.

3. Parse the profiles

Review the example to understand how profile information is stored, and one example of how to flatten and tabulate the data.

Check your work: Use Python to get the profile ID property, the preferred email, and the current institutional affiliation. Then print the profile information and check that the data you extracted is correct.

If you don't want your profile to be publicly visible, you can uncheck the Profile Visibility setting from your Profile/Edit page. With this setting disabled, only authenticated (logged in) OpenReview users can view your profile.

1. Go to https://openreview.net/profile/edit

2. Click on "Personal Info"

3. Under "Profile Visibility", uncheck the box to hide your profile from the public

If your profile is public, unauthenticated individuals can see your:

• Name

• Personal Links

• Career & Education History

• Advisors, Relations & Conflicts (you can hide these items from your profile edit page)

You can see this by copying your profile link and opening it in an incognito browser.

You can customize your venue homepage using Markdown. All Markdown should be validated to ensure that it will not break the layout of the page: https://stackedit.io/

Group Content

Go to your homepage https://openreview.net/group?id=Your/Venue/ID

1. Click on "Edit Group" button above the title of the venue.

2. Scroll down to "Group Content", click to open the edit box and find the field "instructions".

3. In the "value", you can include your instructions in markdown or html as a string.

Markdown example, to customize:

which will be displayed as:

If you received an email with the subject ‘OpenReview profile activation pending’, your profile is in moderation. The fastest way to activate an OpenReview Account is to ensure that you have an email associated with your school or company added and confirmed to your profile.

How to add an institutional email to a pending account

Please note that all three steps must be completed for the institutional email to be confirmed.

1. Open the activation link sent to your email (subject: OpenReview signup confirmation). If your link is expired resend it following the directions .

2. Add an email associated with your institution (university, lab, or company) to your profile. Make sure to press Confirm to save the email to your account.

1. DO NOT close your current window/tab. The verification number sent to your inbox needs to be input in the same window/tab.

2. Confirm that email by pasting the verification code and clicking on Verify.

Common questions about pending profiles

I want to publish / receive emails under a personal email, what do I do?

After creating an account, you can set your preferred email to your personal email account, and this will be the email used for submissions and notifications.

I have an institutional email in my profile, why is my profile still pending?

Please check that your email has (confirmed) next to it in your profile page. If your email is confirmed, it is likely that your institution has not yet been added to our list. Submit a request for us to add your institution to our list through our Feedback form.

I don’t have an institutional email, what else can I do to speed up the process?

If you don’t have any institutional emails, please ensure your other profile information is complete. Ensuring your homepage displays your email and career details, along with a fully completed profile, will facilitate the activation process.

Related pages:

Adding email addresses to your profile and mark them as preferred

1. Go to your profile page at https://openreview.net/profile

2. Click 'Edit Profile'.

3. Locate the 'Emails' section and click the blue plus sign underneath your name.

4. Enter your email and then click 'Confirm'. An email will be sent to your new address.

5. DO NOT close your current window/tab. The verification number sent to your inbox needs to be input in the same window/tab.

6. Confirm that email by pasting the verification code and clicking on Verify.

If you would like to make that email preferred, you can do so by clicking ‘Edit profile’ once more and selecting ‘Make Preferred’ next to your desired email. The option to make an email preferred will not appear until you have confirmed the new email to your profile.

Removing email addresses from your profile

OpenReview uses email addresses associated with current or former affiliations for profile deduplication, conflict detection, and paper coreference. For this reason, OpenReview prefers to keep all current and former institutional email addresses on each user's profile. OpenReview will only send messages to the address marked as “Preferred”. OpenReview only displays obfuscated emails (****@umass.edu) and never releases full email addresses to the public.

If there is an email address you want removed from your profile, please fill out the . Please note that if you have changed institutions, we ask you to add and confirm your new institutional email before requesting that we remove an old or expired email.

An option is now availible to add your ACL Anthology URL to your OpenReview profile. This is an optional field, and if you don't have a personal ACL anthology page it can be ignored.

To locate your ACL Anthology URL, go to https://aclanthology.org, type your publishing name into the Search bar at the top of the page, and then click on the magnifying glass icon to initiate the search.

After the search results are returned, click on the Authors tab and select your name. The personal author pages are auto generated, so it's possible a page for you was not created. If you notice an error in the content of your author page, you can create an issue or submit a pull request https://github.com/acl-org/acl-anthology/.

The author page will list known published name variations, publication list, and links to coauthors as well as venues the author submitted papers to. Your ACL Anthology URL can be found in the address bar.

To add this link to your OpenReview profile, login and click on Edit Profile. Scroll down to the Personal Links Section and you'll see a textbox labeled "ACL Anthology URL". Copy the ACL Anthology URL and paste it in this textbox. Make sure to scroll all the way down the Edit page to submit your changes.

See also:

• Post a test submission

• Post, edit, and remove reviews

If you wish to test your venue workflow, please use the dev site, as testing on your live venue page can cause collisions and issues when you run your workflow live. To do so, please go to dev.openreview.net and complete the following steps:

1. Create a profile for yourself

2. Submit a venue request

3. Email us at [email protected] so that we can deploy the venue for you.

Notes about the dev site

• The dev site uses a separate database from the live site- this means that no information is shared between the two sites.

• Emails are disabled on the dev site, except for signup confirmation links. This means that your test emails will not actually be sent, but they will show up in the messages tab of the site.

• If you want to test with real author names, you must create those profiles on the dev site. Some profiles may already exist from previous testing.

Resetting the Venue

Most stages can be reset by changing the dates and settings to reopen the stage. If you want to reset to the beginning of the review phase:

1. Delete all review from the venue

2. Undeploy in the assignments browser

3. Re- reviewers as necessary

4. Change the dates to reopen the

Some venues with multiple deadlines a year may want to reuse the same reviewer and area chairs from cycle to cycle. In those cases, it is useful to use the python client to copy group members from one group to another rather than recruiting the same people each time. This can be done programmatically or from the UI.

Programmatically

1. If you have not done so, you will need to install and instantiate the openreview-py client.

2. Get the group you are taking members from. You can get an individual group by its id. If you are copying reviewers from one venue iteration to another, for example, do the following:

3. Each group has a field 'members' which is a list of profile IDs or emails belonging to the members of that group. Extract the members:

4. Finally, you can use add_members_to_group to add those members to your new Reviewers group.

From the UI

1. Navigate to https://openreview.net/group/edit?id=<first_venue_id>/Reviewers

2. Under Group Members section click on Select All

1. Then click on Copy Selected

1. Navigate to https://openreview.net/group/edit?id=<second_venue_id>/Reviewers

2. Under the Group Members section select the text box area and click on Add to Group

If you know you have multiple profiles (and access to them):

1. Log in using the email address associated with any one of your profiles. Preferably, the one you want to merge the other profiles into.

2. Add the email address that is already confirmed in your other profile to the profile you're currently logged into. (You can skip to step 3 if you have already added this email address.)

3. Click on "Confirm."

4. You will receive an email to confirm the profile merge. Click on this link - make sure you are logged into the account from which you requested to do the merge.

If you get an 'Merge Forbidden' message, try logging out, logging into the other OpenReview profile, then opening that link again.

If you got an error during profile registration:

Sample: [link] is already in use by [user]

This can happen because you have previously registered an account with this information with OpenReview, or because the publication information is associated with a pre-created account.

1. Finish profile registration without the link that caused the error

2. Fill out the and include in the message your profile ID and the profile ID that you wish to merge with.

Other cases

If you do not recognize a profile flagged as duplicate being yours, or do not have access to the email address of the other profile, please .

OpenReview ECCV 2020 Summary Report

(Professor, UMass Amherst; Director OpenReview project)

(Lead Developer, OpenReview project)

(Professor, U. Freiburg; ECCV 2020 Program Co-chair)

(Professor, JHU; Computer Vision Foundation Board member)

In 2020 the organizers of (one of the flagship conferences in computer vision) decided to move from CMT to OpenReview. This report provides a summary of the ECCV 2020 workflow, the OpenReview services provided, the system performance, and enhancements planned for the next ECCV.

(The Computer Vision Foundation, CVF, has the long-term goal of unifying the CVPR conference workflow tools under one integrated infrastructure. Seeing the success of OpenReview for ICLR over the past seven years, CVF has been providing the OpenReview Foundation with a multi-year financial gift towards this new software development. CVPR is hoping to move to OpenReview in the future.)

OpenReview NeurIPS 2021 Summary Report

(Professor, UMass Amherst; Director OpenReview project)

(Lead Developer, OpenReview project)

(Senior Research Scientist, Yahoo Research; NeurIPS 2021 Program Co-chair)

In 2021 the organizers of NeurIPS (one of the flagship conferences in machine learning) decided to move from CMT to OpenReview. This report provides a summary of the NeurIPS 2021 workflow, the OpenReview services provided, the system performance, and enhancements planned for the next NeurIPS.

The volume of NeurIPS paper submissions has been increasing dramatically over the past decade. NeurIPS also has a history of innovation in peer review.

NeurIPS 2021 workflow was very similar to its previous years: double blind, closed reviewing, with area chairs and senior area chairs, and meta-reviews, with the addition in 2021 of rolling reviewer discussion with authors (rather than a single author response).

See also:

In OpenReview, an Edit is the object used for creating, modifying, or deleting entities (such as Notes, Groups, Edges, etc.). Edits are posted and then applied via inference rules defined by invitations.

See thefor a comprehensive description of the fields of the Edit object. Most commonly, you will interact with the following key fields:

To add existing DBLP publications to your OpenReview profile:

1. Login to OpenReview

You can click on the 'Login' button on the right of the navigation menu, or go to https://openreview.net/login

OpenReview consists of different objects used to hold or interact with data. This section defines briefly each of the objects and how they funciton within OpenReview.

Notes: Primary data objects representing submissions, reviews, comments, and decisions. Each Note contains flexible fields and fine-grained access controls, including readers, writers, and signatures. Notes are created as responses to Invitations, ensuring they adhere to predefined structures and permissions.

Invitations: Templates that define the structure, permissions, and rules for creating or editing entities like Notes and Edges. Invitations specify who can perform certain actions (invitees), who can read the resulting entities (readers), and the expected format of the content. They ensure consistency and enforce workflow rules.

: Collections of users (Profiles) that represent roles like authors, reviewers, or progiram chairs. Groups define permissions and access controls within the system. They are essential for managing who can read, write, or sign various entities.

1. You will need to install the openreview-py package.

2. Create a client object with your OpenReview credentials. If you do not yet have an OpenReview profile, .

To locate your Semantic Scholar URL, go to and search for the name you publish by.

If Semantic Scholar has your data, an author tile with your name will appear under the search bar. If your name is not immediately one of the top tiles, click the "Show All Authors" link to expand the tile section. Click on the author tile.

Once you have identified your author page with the associated papers, the URL in the browser address bar is the Semantic Scholar URL that you can use in OpenReview profile edit page.

If you would like to edit your Semantic Scholar author page or add additional metadata (e.g. affiliation data) you may use the "Claim Author Page" button located under your name at the top left of your Semantic Scholar author page.

Objectives

Learn to use the OpenReview API to:

1. Post new notes

2. Retrieve a specific note

What is ORCID?

is a global, not-for-profit organization that provides unique identifiers for those participating in research, scholarship, and innovation.

Researchers primarily interact with ORCID to obtain an ORCID iD and a record unique to them. This record is populated with publication and service information added either by the researcher directly or by trusted organizations.

Importing ORCID records to OpenReview

The program committee is represented as a group, like Reviewers, Area Chairs, Action Editors, etc. Each of these groups have a property 'members' that can contain a set of groups. Email addresses and profile ids are also represented as groups.

Adding Members to the Group

If you want to build you own group of reviewers, you can simply add them as members to the group.

Using the Group Editor

These exercises are designed to guide workflow chairs through specific tasks that they will need to be able to do in order to successfully support a venue. To use this page, first complete the , then complete the relevant exercise below:

Basic Exercises

Advanced Exercises

I have a question about:

• My profile

• My venue

For OpenReview Profiles

For Program Chairs

Setting up a venue

• ?

• ?

Managing active venues

• ?

• ?

• ?

• ?

For Reviewers

• ?

• ?

For Authors

• ?

Other

• ?

• ?

• ?

1. Making or finding a profile

To create a profile, go to https://openreview.net/signup. Enter your full name as you would like it to appear in publications. A common format is: First Last

By checking the confirmation box, existing profiles with your name will be listed.

Then, take one of the following actions, depending on whether there is a pre-created account, you already have a partial or complete OpenReview Profile, or you are signing up for the first time.

Claim Profile

If a Claim Profile option appears, this means that there is a pre-created profile in OpenReview with your name. These are often associated with DBLP urls, and if you believe an account should belong to you, click the Claim Profile button. Enter your email, click claim, and enter a password, then proceed to the Profile Registration step.

Contact support if: you no longer have access to an email associated with the profile you need to claim, such as a past institution.

Send Activation Link

If there is a profile created with your name, but you didn't finish the activation process, you will see this option. Enter your email address and click ‘Send Activation Link’, you will receive an email with a link that will bring you to the OpenReview (Step 2).

If you do not receive an activation email, refer to:

Reset Password

Existing active accounts will show up with the 'Reset Password' option, and the email domains associated with the account will be displayed. If you believe one of these is your profile, click 'Reset Password', enter your email address and click 'Reset Password' again to send a password reset email.

If you do not receive a password reset email, refer to:

Create a new account

If no existing profiles belong to you and you would like to create a new one, you can fill in your email address in the text field next to the ‘Sign Up’ option and click the 'Sign Up' button. We recommend that you sign up with your institutional (university, company, or organization) email.

If you sign up with a public domain or an email domain that is not included in our institution list you will see a warning:

If you are using an institutional email and get this warning, contact support using Feedback to ask that your domain be added to the list. Signing up with a public domain may take up to 2 weeks in moderation. See for tips on expediting this process.

After typing your email you will then be prompted to enter a new password and send a confirmation email. Clicking the link in the confirmation email will bring you to the registration page.

2. Profile Registration

If you have claimed an inactive profile, resent an activation link, or created a new profile, you will receive an email with the subject 'OpenReview Signup Confirmation'. Follow the link in this email to complete your profile registration. Profile registration is a required step in order to have an active OpenReview Profile.

Providing as complete information as possible, especially an institutional email address and valid personal homepage, will help your account be activated quickly.

A valid homepage is a website that shows your name, affiliation, and email that you used to register for OpenReview. This could be a Google Scholar profile, personal webpage, GitHub, institutional profile page, or other professional homepage.

If you do not have an institutional affiliation, you may sign up as an Independent Researcher. See for detailed instructions on what to include in your profile.

Common issues for Profile registration:

• Validation errors for career/education history or institutional data: See See for a detailed description and examples.

• Relation not found in the dropdown menu: If none of the existing relations are appropriate, you may type in a custom relationship to the textbox.

• Homepage duplication: If you get an error that one of your links can't be added, it is either in the wrong format or already added to another account. Check that there are no exiting or claimable accounts with your email, and if you still don't recognize the account listed in the error, contact OpenReview Support through our .

3. Moderation

After clicking ‘Register for OpenReview’, your profile will either be activated immediately or sent to moderation. Moderation can take up to two weeks, but the support team reviews moderation regularly, and will follow up with additional actions necessary.

If you receive an email indicating that additional information is required to activate your OpenReview profile, return to the Profile Registration Step by , and complete the missing information. See for additional information.

Setup:

1. Complete Prerequisites

2. Add submissions (make sure this is on the dev site)

3. Open the (step 17 in the )

Part 1: Posting LLM generated reviews

In some cases, a venue may want to use LLMs to post reviews. There are 2 steps to enable this:

1. Create an LLM reviewer group for each paper.

2. Add the LLM reviewer groups to each submission reviewers group.

1. Create an LLM reviewer group for each paper

First, you will need to create a new reviewer Group for each paper. This will add the LLM as a Reviewer for the paper.

The reviewer group should have the following format:<venue_id>/Submission<number>/Reviewer_<new_name> . So it's important to have the id of the new group follow this format.

For example: MyConference/2025/Conference/Submission1/Reviewer_LLM

The full post_group_edit call will look like this:

Then you will loop through all of the submissions in the venue.

Check your work: Go to one of the submission groups for the venue and check for your new reviewer group. (https://openreview.net/group/edit?id=<venue_id>/Submission<number>)

2. Add the LLM reviewer groups to each submission reviewers group

Next, you need to add the LLM Reviewers as members to each submission's overall reviewers group. You can do this by calling . It requires 2 fields, group and members .

• Group: The group ID to which you are adding members.

• Members: The ID or IDs you are adding to the group.

The full add_members_to_group call will look like this:

Check your work: Go to one of the submission groups for the venue and check for your new reviewer group in the reviewers group (https://openreview.net/group/edit?id=<venue_id>/Submission<number>/Reviewers)

3. Post reviews using your LLM

Follow the directions here to using your LLM.

Check your work: Go to one of the submission pages (you can navigate here from the PC Console), and check for your review.

3. Delete an LLM review

Follow the directions here to using your LLM.

Check your work: Go to the submission page (you can navigate here from the PC Console), and check that the review was deleted.

Expertise Selection is a task for Program Committee members (such as reviewers) that gives them the opportunity to identify which previous publications they would like to be considered when being matched with submissions to review. If you want to use the same Expertise Selection configuration for multiple venues, it is possible to transfer the expertise from one venue to another using the OpenReview Python client using the following steps.

1.

2. Get Expertise Selection edges from the previous venue

OpenReview by default considers all publications as relevant expertise for paper matching and assignment. In Expertise Selection, edges are posted indicating the papers that should be excluded from paper matching. You can get the edges from a previous venue using the following method:

You will need the following information:

• profile_id: Your profile ID (such as ~First_Last1). Also see

• from_venue_id: The id of the venue you want to transfer expertise from. Also see:

• group_name: The name of the group you are in on the Program Committee (typically this is Reviewers or Area_Chairs)

The number of edges should correspond with the number of papers that you are excluding from Expertise Selection.

3. Copy edges to new venue

Finally, post an edge to the new venue that you are doing Expertise Selection for:

For an overview and basics of form customization, see the comprehensive .

You can customize the for your venue using the button on your . In the 'Additional Submission Options', field, enter valid JSON with the fields that you would like to add or change in your form. Shown below is an example of adding a field for authors to nominate a reviewer from the author list of their paper.

The resulting field in the submission form would look like this:

See also:

• Technical reference for Groups

• Managing Groups for Venue Workflows

In OpenReview, a Group object represents a collection of users (individuals or other groups) and serves as the core mechanism for managing permissions, roles, and access control. Groups define who can read, write, sign, or modify content such as Notes and Invitations. They are hierarchical and addressable using a path-like ID (e.g., ICLR.cc/2025/Conference/Reviewers).

To give fine-grained control over readership, individuals within a conference are typically members of many groups. For example, a reviewer for the conference Test/2025/Conference assigned to Submissions 1 and 10 would likely be in the following groups:

• Reviewer group: This contains all reviewers that accepted the recruitment invitationTest/2025/Conference/Reviewers

• Relevant submission groups: These groups give assigned reviewers (rather than all reviewers) the ability to view and post reviews for submissions they are assigned to. In this case it would be: Test/2025/Conference/Submission1/Reviewers Test/2025/Conference/Submission10/Reviewers

• Relevant anonymous groups: These groups give the reviewer the ability to remain anonymous during the review process:

Structure

You can find a description of all fields of the Group object in the . You will most often interact with the following key fields:

• id: Unique identifier for the group (e.g., ICLR.cc/2025/Conference/Reviewers).

• members: List of user IDs or group IDs that are members.

Retrieving Groups

You can retrieve groups using the get_group or get_groups method:

The prefix parameter allows filtering by group ID hierarchy.

Quickstart: Get a list of all active venues

Quickstart: See a venue's information

Within this group, content is a dictionary that contains information about the venue.

To see all possible keys contained in a venue group's content object, you can use the following:

You can query the information within this dictionary to get more information about the venue. For example: venue_group.get_content_value('submission_id') will tell you the name of the Submission invitation.

Quickstart: Get pending invited Area Chairs/ Reviewers

Working with groups

Most of the changes that you want to make with groups can be made from the UI. See the section for specific instructions on working with groups. In some specific cases, you may need to programmatically create or modify groups.

Creating Groups

The majority of groups are created automatically in the workflow. However, Program Chairs (but not other roles) have the access necessary to create groups, should they need to.

To add a group, you would use post_group_edit function. This creates a group with a specific id that you can then add members to. As an example, if you ant to add an LLM Reviewer to each Submission Group 1:

The new group ID would be: MyConference/2025/Conference/Submission1/Reviewer_LLM

The full post_group_edit call will look like this:

Adding Members

To add members to a group, you use the function add_members_to_group , where group is the group id to add to, and members is group or list of profile ids to add.

An alternative approach uses the more general post_group_edit function to modify groups which gives more flexibility how to modify groups. To use this function to add mamebers:

Removing Members

The function post_group_edit can also be used to remove members from a group by using the keyword remove:

Replacing Members

Finally, post_group_edit can also be used to replace the members of a group with new members with the keyword replace .

OpenReview is releasing a major update of the forum page for venues using the new API (v2). While the interface will look familiar, it should be faster, more flexible, and offer new ways to quickly find the content you are looking for.

Anatomy of a Forum Reply

Here is an example of a typical forum comment:

Every post on the new forum page contains the following information:

1. Title: title may be provided by the author of the post or it may be a generic title. Clicking the link icon next to the title copies a direct link to this post to your clipboard.

2. Reply Type: represents the type of forum reply, and comes from the name of the invitation that was used to create the post.

3. Signature: shows the identity of the user who posted the reply. If the reply comes from a group and you have permission to see the members of the group, their identities will be shown in parenthesis next to the signature.

4. Creation Date: shows when the reply was posted and when it was last modified

5. Readers: shows who this post is visible to

6. Revisions Link: see a list of all edits made (for more see "Editing Posted Content" below)

7. Edit & Delete: allows you to modify or hide the reply (for more see "Editing Posted Content" below)

8. Content: shows the complete content of the forum reply

9. Collapse Toggles: allows you to show more or less of the content of the note. The top button will collapse everything down to a single line displaying just basic information, the middle button will only show the first 5-10 lines of content, and the bottom button will display the entire contents of the note.

10. Reply Buttons: show all the available options for replying to this post. Clicking one of the buttons will open a form that allows you to submit your reply.

Sorting and Filtering Replies

The new forum page provides advanced controls for sorting and filtering replies such as comments, reviews, private responses, and PC decisions. The new controls look something like this:

1. Invitation Filter: show only replies of a certain type. Can select multiple invitations (types) to show replies matching any of those invitations.

2. Author Filter: show only replies signed by the selected user or group. Can select multiple authors to show all replies that include any one of the selections as a signature.

3. Keyword Filter: show all replies that match the phrase. Matches can come from the content of the reply, the title, or the invitation.

Forum Layout Options

As mentioned in the section above there are currently three layout modes available for forum pages. These are:

• Linear: all replies are shown at the same level of nesting (no indentation). This is useful to quickly see a chronological feed of all forum replies. If a given post is a reply to another reply (not a general reply to the submission note) the title of that reply will be shown in gray above the title. Clicking on this gray title will scroll the page to that reply.

• Threaded: one level of nesting is shown. This layout is useful to group conversations into overarching topics.

• Nested: two levels of nesting are shown. This is useful for breaking larger conversations down into sub threads.

Editing Posted Content

If you are logged into OpenReview and have permission to modify the content of a submission or a forum reply (aka a ) you will see a dropdown button labeled Edit to the right of the title. Clicking this button will display a list of all the available ways to modify the note (aka edit Invitations). For a submission note this might include options to revise the submission or withdraw the submission, and for a reply it might include the option to edit the content of the reply.

You can see a list of all the edits of a given note by clicking on the Revisions link below the title.

Providing Feedback

We hope that you find the new functionality useful. If there is anything you would like to see changed or added please fill out the with the subject "New Forum Page Feedback".

Profiles in OpenReview represent the identity of users on the platform—such as authors, reviewers, and area chairs. Each profile serves as a record user's publications, affiliations, and roles within the OpenReview system.

What’s in a Profile?

A profile typically includes:

See also:

• Technical Reference for Notes

• Guide for getting notes (submissions, reviews, etc)

• Guide for exporting submission and other information

What is a note?

The Note is the core data object in OpenReview that is used to represent content such as submissions, reviews, comments, official responses, and more. Notes are created and governed by invitations, which define their schema and permissions.

For detailed information about the Note object and its fields, see . A few fields that are particularly important for interacting with notes are id, invitation ,readers , and content.

• id - unique identifier for the Note

• invitation is used to identify the schema used to generate and validate the note. In practice, this is most commonly used for identifying all notes for example identifying all Reviews or all Rebuttals.

• readers identifies which groups are the readers of a note or a field within a note

Notes, Replies, and Forums

A Reply is a specific type of Note that is linked to another Note—such as a comment on a submission or a review in response to a paper.

id

• The unique identifier of a specific Note.

• Every Note, whether standalone or a reply, has its own id.

forum

• The forum field indicates the top-level Note thread the current Note belongs to.

• For a submission, forum == id, since it starts its own thread.

• For a reply, forum is the id of the original submission Note it belongs to.

replyto

• The replyto field indicates the direct parent of the current Note.

• A top-level Note (like a submission) has replyto=None.

• A review or comment will have replyto set to the id of the Note it is directly responding to (could be a submission or another comment).

In OpenReview, typically Submissions are the top-level Note, and other Notes posted in relationship to the Submission is a reply. The example below shows a forum page for an example submission. In this case, the Submission is the top-level note, the Official Review is a reply to the Submission, and the Official Comment is a reply to the Official Comment.

The data structure of the above forum is as below:

Creating, Editing, and Deleting Notes (Inference)

Operations on Notes are performed via . The first Edit posted is for the creation of the note, any revisions of the notes can be made by posting Edits with the relevant fields, and deleting a Note object is done by posting and Edit adding a date to the ddate field. See below for examples of each operation.

To create/modify a Note, you post an Edit with the necessary fields:

• invitation: The ID of the Invitation governing the Note. This is used to ensure that the Edit is well-formed and conforms to the specifications in the invitation.

• signatures: List of group IDs authorizing the Edit.

• note: The Note object containing fields like readers, writers

Note Validation

Before the is posted, the content of both the Edit and the Note within is checked to ensure that it fits the parameters of the Invitation. In particular, the dictionary content needs to include only fields specified in the invitation. Between the notes and all edits of the note, all required fields must be present in the note.

How to use this document: This document lists the major steps of running a conference venue. Each step links to relevant documentation that explains it in depth.

Setting up a venue

1. Submit venue request through the OpenReview Site

Fill out the venue request form and choose settings for your venue.

OpenReview will review the request, ask for any necessary clarification, then you will receive an email notifying you that your venue has been deployed.

Also see:

2.

Ensure all PCs have OpenReview accounts associated with the email listed in the venue request form in order to access venue pages.

3.

You may edit many settings for your venue through the 'Revision' button of the request form.

4.

Recruitment can happen at any point in the workflow. All participants (Area Chairs, Reviewers, etc.) must have an OpenReview account linked to the email used in the recruitment message.

5. (optional)

You may choose to add a task for program committee members to remind them to complete their registration.

Submission Phase

6. Submissions Open

Submissions automatically open on the date/time listed in the venue request form. If no date is given, submissions open as soon as the venue is deployed.

Note: All submitting authors must have an active OpenReview Profile.

7. (Optional)

Use this if you want to have an abstract deadline ahead of the main submission deadline.

8. Submissions close

Submissions will automatically close on the date specified in the venue request form. To change the submission deadline, see .

9. Update readers/ hide fields from authors using

Set up matches between submissions and program committee

Set up matching should be done in the direction Senior Area Chairs-> Area Chairs-> Submissions, then Reviewers should be assigned to submissions. The basic stages of this workflow is to:

2. (optional)

4. Look at, and potentially proposed assignments

Each of these steps needs to be completed for each group being matched (e.g. Area Chairs - Submissions , Reviewers - Submissions)- Described further in steps 11-16 below.

10. Assign Senior Area Chairs to Area Chairs

Most venues assign SACs to submissions by first assigning them to Area Chairs. Here you may decide whether to have SACs automatically assigned to ACs or based on affinity scores by following steps 1-5 above.

To assign SACs to ACs, choose 'Senior Area Chairs' as the matching group in paper matching setup. Then in the Paper Matching Stage, SACs will be the matching group, and ACs will be in the Submissions field.

Note: Matching between SACs and ACs will not calculate conflicts. Instead, the conflicts to the SACs will be transferred to the ACs and calculated at the AC matching stage.

Program Chairs can make reassignments after the proposed assignments are deployed or assignments.

It is very important to deploy Senior Area Chair assignments before assigning submissions to Area Chairs to allow conflicts to be transferred successfully.

If you decide to directly assign Senior Area Chairs to submissions, skip to step 12.

11.

The next step is to assign the program committee to each submission. If your conference is smaller than 2000 submissions, this can be run by you directly, otherwise please contact OpenReview.

It is very important that all Program Committee members (Senior Area Chairs, Area Chairs, and Reviewers) have a complete OpenReview profile (an active profile with at least one active institution and one publication). We recommend removing from the committee groups all the profiles that are not complete before running the matching system.

12. (Optional) Bidding period for Senior Area Chairs, Area Chairs and Reviewers

Program Chairs can optionally ask the Senior Area Chairs, Area Chairs and/or Reviewers to .

PCs must make all the existing submissions visible to all the members of the Senior Area Chairs/Area Chair/Reviewers group hiding the PDF, supplementary material and any other fields they don’t want Senior Area Chairs/Area Chair/Reviewers to see by using the stage.

In order for conflicts to be taken into account in paper matching, matching set up (Step 14) must be run before the bid stage.

The bidding console shows the submissions sorted by affinity scores of the logged user and filtering out the ones that are in conflict with the user.

Note: when the conference is large, only sparse scores are uploaded to the system, this means we only keep the first N (400) scores for each user and submission. Users will see at least 400 submissions sorted by their affinity scores. If they want to see other submissions that are not among the top 400 they should use the “search” functionality.

13.

After computing affinity scores and optionally enabling the bidding process, Program Chairs can run the paper matching system to assign Senior Area Chairs/Area Chairs/Reviewers to Submissions. Program Chairs can assign Senior Area Chairs/Area Chairs/Reviewers at different stages because they are independent processes.

14. (optional) Share Reviewer-Submission proposed assignments with Area Chairs to review and edit.

Some venues decide to share the Reviewer-Submission assignments with the Area Chairs to review before releasing them to the Reviewers.

In order to do this, Program Chairs need to the Area Chair-Submission assignments so that Area Chairs can see their own assigned submissions and choose a matching configuration to share the proposed assignments. Then you can .

. This must be requested to the support team.

15.

After the proposed assignments were reviewed by the Program Chairs and/or the Senior Area Chairs/Area Chairs, they can be deployed and be visible to the Reviewers. Deploying assignments doesn’t automatically send emails to the Reviewers- it is recommended that you as PCs notify them.

16. (optional) Modify assignments

Deployed assignments can be by the Program Chairs and Senior Area Chairs. Program Chairs can also decide if they want to . When a reassignment is done, an email notification is sent to the new Reviewer.

Review Stage

17. Start review period

You can start the review period through the . You may also at this point the.

Note: There are two fields with default names “rating” and “confidence” that are used to compute stats in the different consoles. You may modify these fields but make sure to specify the names in the field of the Revision Stage.

It is also important to choose what groups a review should be visible to. A common configuration is that reviews are only visible to the assigned Senior Area Chair, Area Chair and Reviewers. You may change the readers of reviews at any time using the

18. ends

The deadline field of the Review Stage form will be the one shown to reviewers as the advertised deadline. The expiration date in the form (not seen by reviewers) will be the time after which no more reviews can be submitted. After this point, reviewers will need to contact the PCs for any late reviews.

19. to the authors and other reviewers

If there are still pending reviews, setting Release Reviews to Authors to "Yes, reviews should be revealed when they are posted to the paper's authors", will release all posted reviews, and later will release pending reviews after they are posted.

(Optional) Rebuttal Stage

20. Start Rebuttal stage

Usually venues have a rebuttal period where Authors can reply to the Reviewers. In OpenReview, the rebuttal period can start at any time using the . They can choose between settings to allow a free number of rebuttal comments or require authors to have one rebuttal per Submission/Review.

PCs may also use the so that reviewers can optionally reply to the authors and keep threaded discussions.

(Optional) Submission revision stage

21. Start

You may optionally allow authors to revise their submissions, including limiting which fields can be edited. This stage can be enabled any time after the submission deadline has passed.

(Optional) Meta-review Stage

22.

When the review period has concluded, the PCs can start the where the ACs make their recommendations.

23. (optional) Start meta review confirmation period

Use this if you have Senior Area Chairs and want them to review, confirm, or revise the meta review posted by the Area Chair.

24. (optionaI) ACs rate reviews

You may also optionally allow Area Chairs to submit ratings for their reviews (found in ).

Decision Stage and Camera Ready Revisions

25.

This is the last step before releasing the decision to the authors. PCs need to submit the final based on the AC meta reviews and confirmations. Decisions are visible to the PCs only.

For large venues (>2000 submissions) we offer a bulk upload process where the PCs can get the meta reviews values, edit them to meet the acceptance rates and then upload them to the system. The PC console will show the decision stats and decision notes can be edited after they are uploaded.

26.

Once all the decisions are made and uploaded to the system, you may them to the authors and send email notifications using the . OpenReview offers a where the PCs can define the email template for each decision.

PCs can also (optionally) decide to release the submissions to the public (all the submissions or accepted only) and deanonymize the author names.

27. Start camera ready period

The camera ready period starts after the authors are notified about the submission decisions. To begin, open the . Make sure to enable the setting 'Enable revision for accepted submissions only'.

28. End camera ready period

Authors will no longer be able to edit submissions after the Camera Ready period deadline set in the Submission Revision Stage. After this point, they will need to contact the PCs to allow any revisions after the deadline.

These are the settings that you can change for your journal:

Note: AE - Action Editor; EIC - Editor-in-Chief

Journal Settings

• website_urls