Open peer review website, submissions, forums, profiles, and APIs

OpenReview

OpenReview is a website and research platform for open peer review, conference submissions, public discussion, venue workflows, reviewer profiles, preprints, proceedings, and API-based scholarly data access.

Official site

openreview.net is the main public website for OpenReview.

Purpose

OpenReview provides configurable peer-review and publishing workflows for conferences, journals, workshops, and other reviewing venues.

Access model

The platform supports free access to hosted papers, free paper submissions, public discussion, and API access for approved workflows.

OpenReview is a website and research platform for open peer review, conference submissions, forums, profiles, and API-based scholarly data access.View logo in the OpenReview web repository

What OpenReview is

OpenReview is a cloud-based website at openreview.net for managing scholarly peer review and open scientific discussion. It combines venue pages, paper submissions, reviews, comments, decisions, author profiles, and an underlying database API.

Open peer review

The platform is built around configurable openness. A venue can decide which parts of the process are public, anonymous, restricted to program committees, visible after acceptance, or opened for continuing discussion. That flexibility lets communities experiment with review policies while still handling confidentiality, attribution, and bias concerns.

Venues and submissions

OpenReview is widely associated with machine learning and artificial intelligence conferences, but its venue model is broader than one field. Conference organizers, journal editors, workshop chairs, and other reviewing groups can create venue workflows for submissions, reviewer assignments, rebuttals, meta-reviews, decisions, camera-ready versions, and proceedings.

Forums, notes, and profiles

A paper page on OpenReview is usually a forum thread. The platform's documentation describes Notes as core content objects for submissions, reviews, comments, responses, and related posts, while Profiles represent users such as authors, reviewers, and area chairs. Together, those objects make the review record searchable and permission-aware.

APIs and automation

OpenReview exposes API access for venue administration, data export, searching notes, managing groups, and building research tools. The current documentation refers to API 2 as the default API, while legacy API v1 remains relevant for some older conference workflows.

Strengths and limits

OpenReview is strong when a scholarly community wants transparency, structured workflows, public paper pages, and reusable review data. Its limits are the same tensions that surround open peer review generally: reviewer privacy, uneven venue policies, moderation needs, temporary confidentiality, and the risk that readers mistake a public review trail for a simple quality label.

Why it matters

Peer review shapes which research gets attention, funding, replication, and trust. OpenReview matters because it makes parts of that process visible and inspectable. For readers, it can reveal reviewer concerns and author responses; for organizers, it supplies workflow infrastructure; for researchers, it creates data that can be studied to improve peer review itself.

WHOIS domain data

Data pulled: June 1, 2026View current WHOIS record

Domain: openreview.net
IP address: 34.120.73.14
Registrar: Cloudflare, Inc.
WHOIS server: whois.cloudflare.com
Referral URL: http://www.cloudflare.com
Created: October 9, 2012
Updated: February 19, 2025
Expires: October 9, 2026
Nameservers: dimitris.ns.cloudflare.com (108.162.195.6); dorthy.ns.cloudflare.com (172.64.32.249)
Domain status: clientTransferProhibited; clienttransferprohibited
DNSSEC: unsigned
Contact privacy: Registrant, admin, technical, and billing contact details are redacted.

Key concepts

VenueA conference, journal, workshop, or reviewing group that manages submissions and review policies on OpenReview.
ForumA paper-centered discussion page that can contain submissions, reviews, comments, responses, and decisions.
NoteA core OpenReview content object used for submissions, reviews, comments, official responses, and similar posts.
ProfileA user identity record for authors, reviewers, area chairs, and other participants in the review process.

Common workflows

Authors submit papers, revise metadata, respond to reviews, and view decisions according to the venue's rules.
Reviewers, area chairs, and editors read submissions, post reviews, manage conflicts, and coordinate decisions.
Readers browse accepted papers, public reviews, comments, author pages, and venue pages when access policies allow it.
Developers and researchers use APIs to search notes, export data, or automate approved venue tasks.

Common misconceptions

OpenReview does not mean every review identity is public; each venue configures its own visibility and anonymity rules.
A paper appearing on OpenReview is not always an accepted paper, because submissions and under-review records can also be hosted there.
Open peer review is not the same as open access, although OpenReview can support both public discussion and free paper access.
API visibility follows platform permissions, so public pages and private review workflows are not the same data surface.

Open questions

Which peer-review details should be public by default, and which should remain private to protect reviewers and authors?
How can open review systems reduce bias without discouraging frank technical criticism?
What governance model best supports shared peer-review infrastructure as conference traffic and automation grow?