On Desk Rejections and Assisted Desk Rejections at CHI 2027
Decisions went out this week to the authors of papers that were desk-rejected or not advanced to full review. For many, this was disappointing news, arriving with less feedback than a traditional review cycle provides. We have heard from many of you since, and we want to address your concerns directly. Why the Process Evolved…
CHI 2027 Papers: Desk Rejects and ADR
Summary Of the 7,743 complete submissions, 608 (7.9%) were desk rejected, and 20 (0.3%) were withdrawn, so 7,115 papers (91.9%) went on to the Assisted Desk Reject (ADR) stage. Of these, 2,308 (29.8% of all submissions) were rejected at the ADR stage, and 4,807 (62.1%) continued to full review, see Table 1. OutcomePaper Count% of…
Insights Into the Program Committee
With the papers' deadline behind us and the review process started, we would like to give the community a look into the CHI 2027 paper program committee (excluding external reviewers). CHI 2027 organizes the papers track differently from previous years: there are no subcommittees; however, the committee is structured in a more agile subcommunity structure.…
CHI 2027 Workshops: What’s New?
CHI 2027 Workshops: What's New? Authors: Xingyu Lan, Tommaso Turchi, Abdallah El Ali Date: 2026-09-24 CHI 2027 takes place on May 10-14, 2027, at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh. The call for workshop proposals is open until Thursday, October 1, 2026, AoE, and as Workshops Chairs, we are also recruiting jurors to…
How We Check Reviewer Eligibility for CHI 2027
Good news! We know that some authors are struggling to get DBLP into author profiles ahead of the deadline. We will be able to provide a few days grace on this. Please make sure you and your coauthors fix this by Monday, 14 Sept AOE. CHI 2027 asks every submission to commit four review-responsibility slots…
The CHI 2027 Submission Checklist
The CHI 2027 submission process differs in several respects from previous years. The restructured review model, the review responsibility slots, and the new paper-reviewer matching system have all been described in earlier posts on this blog, and the authoritative requirements are set out in the Call for Papers and the Papers Review Process page. Several…
AI-Assisted Tools in the CHI 2027 Papers Review Process: What They Do, What They Do Not Do, and How Humans Remain Responsible
Introduction In our recent post explaining the CHI 2027 Papers review process, we said we would pilot several AI-assisted and automated tools. We also said we would provide more information about those tools. This blog post aims to serve that purpose by covering questions such as: What exactly are these tools doing? What information do…
Submitting a CHI 2027 paper means sharing responsibility for peer review
Peer review only works when peers review. Every CHI paper depends on members of our community reading submissions carefully, providing constructive feedback, and helping the conference reach fair and well-reasoned decisions. As CHI has grown, however, this work has increasingly fallen on a relatively small group of volunteers. That is neither fair to those volunteers…
How the CHI 2027 Papers Review Process Will Work
This blog post aims to explain what has changed in the CHI 2027 paper review process and provide justification for those changes. CHI is growing. That growth reflects the vitality, breadth, and global relevance of HCI. It also means that the review process must evolve so that it remains fair, sustainable, rigorous, and respectful of…
Finding the Right Reviewers: Building a New Paper-Reviewer Matching System for CHI Papers
A central goal of the CHI papers review process is to find the right reviewers for each paper. By “right,” we mean reviewers who meet the minimum qualifications for reviewers and who have the appropriate expertise to review the paper - both topically and methodologically. A good reviewer match is not just someone who knows…