Call for papers
Fri May 18, 2018 20:00 PM UTC
You may upload an early version of your paper well before the deadline. Replacing an earlier version is allowed and does not take long, so please upload as early as possible. In particular, please upload supplementary material early to avoid server congestion near the deadline.
Online submission system (CMT)
All submissions must be made via the NIPS 2018 CMT site. The site will start accepting submissions about two weeks before the submission deadline. If you are a both an author and a reviewer or area chair, please use the same email address for both roles in CMT. If your submission will be uploaded by one of your co-authors, please tell them which email address to use for you in CMT (i.e., the same one you are using as a reviewer or area chair).
Please note that NIPS is using CMT3 for the first time this year.
Frequently asked questions can be found here.
All submissions must be in PDF format. Submissions are limited to eight content pages, including all figures and tables, in the NIPS “submission” style; additional pages containing only references are allowed. You must use the NIPS 2018 LaTeX style file; this year’s style file incorporates several new changes (including a new “preprint” option for non-anonymous preprints). You will be required to validate the formatting of your submission using the NIPS paper checker; please check that your submission validates well in advance of the deadline to avoid server congestion. The maximum file size for submissions is 50MB. Submissions that violate the NIPS style (e.g., by decreasing margins or font sizes) or page limits may be rejected without further review.
Authors may submit up to 100MB of supplementary material, such as proofs, derivations, data, or source code; all supplementary material must be in PDF or ZIP format. To submit supplementary material, first upload your submission. You will then be able to upload supplementary material from the author console. Looking at supplementary material is at the discretion of the reviewers.
Non-anonymous preprints (on arXiv, social media, websites, etc.) are permitted, though preprints in the NIPS style must use the new “preprint” option, rather than the “final” option. Reviewers will be instructed not to actively look for such preprints, but encountering them will not constitute a conflict of interest. Authors may submit work to NIPS that is already available as a preprint (e.g., on arXiv) without citing it; however, previously published papers by the authors on related topics must be cited (with adequate anonymization to preserve double-blind reviewing; see below).
Dual submissions will be identified via a combination of automated methods and human (reviewer, area chair, senior area chair, program chair) judgment. NIPS coordinates with other conferences to identify dual submissions. Submissions that are identical or substantially similar to papers that are in submission to, have been accepted to, or have been published in other archival conferences, journals, workshops, etc. will be deemed dual submissions. Submissions that are identical or substantially similar to other NIPS submissions will also be deemed dual submissions; submissions should be distinct and sufficiently substantial. Note that slicing contributions too thinly may result in submissions being deemed dual submissions. The program chairs reserve the right to reject all NIPS submissions by all authors of dual submissions, not just those deemed dual submissions. The NIPS policy on dual submissions applies for the entire duration of the reviewing process (i.e., from the submission deadline to the notification date). If you require further clarification of this policy or the definition of dual submissions, please contact the program chairs.
The reviewing process will be double blind at the level of reviewers and area chairs (i.e., reviewers and area chairs cannot see author identities) but not at the level of senior area chairs and program chairs. As an author, you are responsible for anonymizing your submission. In particular, you should not include author names, author affiliations, or acknowledgements in your submission and you should avoid providing any other identifying information (even in the supplementary material). If you need to cite one of your own papers, you should do so with adequate anonymization to preserve double-blind reviewing (e.g., write “In the previous work of Author et al. …” rather than “In our previous work ...”). If you need to cite one of your own papers that is in submission to NIPS or elsewhere please do so with adequate anonymization and make sure the cited submission is available for reviewers to read (e.g., if the cited submission is available as a non-anonymous preprint, then write “Author et al.  concurrently show…”; if the cited submission is not available as a non-anonymous preprint, then include a copy of the cited submission in the supplementary material and write “Anonymous et al.  concurrently show...”).
Toronto Paper Matching System
NIPS uses the Toronto Paper Matching System (TPMS) in order to assign submissions to reviewers and area chairs. TPMS computes similarity scores between NIPS submissions and reviewers’ papers. During the submission process, you will be asked whether you agree to the use of TPMS for your submission. You are not forced to agree; however, disagreeing may hinder the program chairs in finding the most appropriate reviewers for your submission.
Submissions may be withdrawn at any point in the reviewing process; to withdraw a submission, please contact the program chairs. For statistical purposes, the program chairs will count a submission as “rejected” if it is withdrawn after reviews have been made available to authors.
Submissions that violate the NIPS style or page limits, are not within the scope of NIPS (see subject areas), are in submission elsewhere, or have already been published elsewhere may be rejected without further review. Submissions that have fatal flaws revealed by the reviewers—including (without limitation) incorrect proofs or flawed or insufficient wet-lab, hardware, or software experiments—may be rejected on that basis, without taking into consideration other criteria. Other submissions will be judged on the basis of their technical quality, novelty, potential impact, and clarity. Typical NIPS papers often (but not always) include a mix of algorithmic, theoretical, and experimental results, in varying proportions. While theoretically grounded arguments are certainly welcome, it is counterproductive to add “decorative math” whose primary purpose is to make the submission look more substantial or even intimidating, without adding significant insight. Algorithmic contributions should have at least an illustration of how the algorithm might eventually materialize into a machine learning application.
Authors will have a one-week opportunity to view and respond to initial reviews. The program chairs reserve the right to solicit additional reviews after the author-response period.
Publication of submissions
After decisions have been made, reviews, meta-reviews, and author responses for accepted submissions will be made public (but reviewer, area chair, and senior area chair identities will remain anonymous). Authors of rejected submissions will also have the option of making their submissions, reviews, meta-reviews, and author responses public if they wish (again, reviewer, area chair, and senior area chair identities will remain anonymous). Camera-ready papers will be due in advance of the conference; however, authors will be allowed to make minor changes, such as fixing typos or adding references, for a short period of time after the conference.