aamas-review-process

1# AAMAS Review Process
2 
3Use this to reason about review-stage strategy. Reopen the current CFP, OpenReview group,
4author and reviewer instructions, and the code of conduct before making process claims; AAMAS
5review specifics move between editions.
6 
7## Process model
8 
9- AAMAS runs submission and review on OpenReview under the IFAAMAS namespace in recent cycles.
10- Reviewers evaluate technical correctness, the significance of the interaction contribution,
11  the reality and rigor of the multiagent evaluation, clarity, reproducibility, and fit with
12  agents-and-multiagent-systems scope.
13- A rebuttal lets authors respond to preliminary reviews before the final decision; area chairs
14  then synthesize.
15- Accepted papers and their reviews are published, so the review record is durable and public.
16- The most useful rebuttal gives the area chair a clean rationale for acceptance, not a
17  point-by-point defense of every comment.
18 
19## Who reviews here
20 
21- The pool mixes game theorists, multiagent-RL researchers, mechanism-design and social-choice
22  specialists, and systems-minded reviewers; expect at least one to read the game definition and
23  solution concept line by line.
24- Because AAMAS is specialized, a paper is likely to meet a reviewer who works on exactly its
25  subarea, so a vague equilibrium claim or an under-specified opponent set gets caught rather
26  than skimmed.
27- Borderline interaction papers usually fail on one of three edges: the result turns out to be
28…