Conference

NeurIPS 2025 Call for Ethics Reviewers

· · 2 min read · 14 views

NeurIPS 2025 Call for Ethics Reviewers If you are able and willing to participate in the review process, please sign up at this form . Feel free to share this call with your colleagues. Key Dates We ask that ethics reviewers: Review up to 5 papers each, Provide ethics reviews during at least one of the following periods: July 7 - 20, 2025, (main ethics review period)* August 7 - 18, 2025**, August 21 - August 27, 2025**, and/or August 28 - September 10, 2025**. * Note that ICML takes place July 13-19. ** For these review periods, reviews may come in at any time during this time window. A full list of relevant dates for the conference is available here . About the ethics review process The main reviews conducted through the program committee (reviewers, program chairs and area chairs) is, and continues to be, the sole decision making process for accepting or rejecting papers for publications at NeurIPS. Reviewers are expected to review submissions not just for pure technical merit, but also in the context of the NeurIPS Code of Ethics . The ethics review is a second round of review that takes place mainly when the program committee flags any potential concerns during the main review phase that merits further attention. Ethics reviewers provide feedback to the program committee regarding risks and harms of the work in line with the NeurIPS Code of Ethics , and recommend potential mitigations that can be provided to authors to incorporate as feedback to revise their submissions. The ethics review process is not a disciplinary or punitive process . However, in rare situations, the NeurIPS program committee may decide to reject submissions that have grossly violated the NeurIPS Code of Ethics , taking into account recommendations from the ethics reviews. When such situations occurred in the past, the authors were provided with substantial guidance and relevant citations, and were invited to revise and resubmit to NeurIPS. As detailed in the Ethics Guidelines for Reviewers , the ethics reviews generally follow the double-blinded review process of the main reviews. ​However, additional steps are taken in order to minimize exposure risks. During the ethics review process, any submissions flagged for ethics review will not be publicly labeled as such. During the author response period, ethics reviews will be anonymized when made visible to authors and main reviewers. When the final accept or reject decision has been made, authors who have accepted papers may, at their discretion, choose to make their ethics review public. Disclaimer. The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of the City of New York or its Office of Technology and Innovation. Thank you for your consideration, 2025 ETHICS REVIEW COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS Jiahao Chen, Director of AI/ML, New York City Office of Technology and Innovation Stephanie Hyland, Principal Researcher, Microsoft Research Hima Lakkaraju, Assistant Professor, Harvard University ethics-review-chairs@neurips.cc Successful Page Load NeurIPS uses cookies for essential functions only. We do not sell your personal information. Our Privacy Policy » Accept

Executive Summary

The NeurIPS 2025 Call for Ethics Reviewers aims to recruit experts to review paper submissions for potential ethics concerns. Reviewers will assess risks and harms in line with the NeurIPS Code of Ethics and provide feedback to authors. The ethics review process is a secondary review phase that complements the main technical review process, focusing on identifying and mitigating potential ethical issues in research submissions.

Key Points

  • ▸ Call for ethics reviewers to participate in the NeurIPS 2025 review process
  • ▸ Ethics reviewers will assess papers for potential ethics concerns and provide feedback
  • ▸ The ethics review process is a secondary review phase that complements the main technical review process

Merits

Comprehensive Review Process

The inclusion of an ethics review process demonstrates a commitment to ensuring that research submissions meet high ethical standards.

Expert Feedback

Ethics reviewers provide valuable feedback to authors, enabling them to address potential ethics concerns and improve their research.

Demerits

Potential Bias

The ethics review process may be subject to bias, as reviewers' perspectives and values can influence their assessments of ethics concerns.

Additional Burden on Reviewers

The ethics review process may impose an additional burden on reviewers, who must already review papers for technical merit.

Expert Commentary

The NeurIPS 2025 Call for Ethics Reviewers represents a significant step towards promoting ethics in AI research. By engaging experts in the review process, NeurIPS can ensure that research submissions are not only technically sound but also aligned with ethical principles. However, it is crucial to address potential limitations, such as bias and reviewer burden, to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of the ethics review process. As the field of AI continues to evolve, the importance of ethics review will only continue to grow, and initiatives like this will play a vital role in shaping the future of responsible AI research.

Recommendations

  • ✓ NeurIPS should provide clear guidelines and training for ethics reviewers to ensure consistency and fairness in the review process.
  • ✓ The conference organizers should consider implementing measures to minimize reviewer burden and promote diversity among ethics reviewers.

Sources

Related Articles