The AHLI Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning (CHIL) solicits work across a variety of disciplines at the intersection of machine learning and healthcare. CHIL 2025 invites submissions focused on artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) techniques that address challenges in health, which we view broadly as including clinical healthcare, public health, population health, and beyond.
Specifically, authors are invited to submit 8-10 page papers (with unlimited pages for references) to one of 3 possible tracks: Models and Methods, Applications and Practice, or Impact and Society. Each track is described in detail below. Authors will select exactly one primary track when they register each submission, in addition to one or more sub-disciplines. Appropriate track and sub-discipline selection will ensure that each submission is reviewed by a knowledgeable set of reviewers.
Early Dec 2025: Submissions site opens
Early Feb 2025: Submissions due
Early Feb 2025: Bidding opens for reviewers
Early to mid-Feb 2025: Bidding closes for reviewers
Mid-Feb 2025: Reviews assigned
Late Feb 2025: Reviews due
Early March 2025: Reviews released
Early to mid-March 2025: Author/reviewer discussion period
Late March 2025: Meta-review period
Early April 2025: Author notification
Late June 2025: CHIL conference
Works submitted to CHIL will be reviewed by at least 3 reviewers. Detailed reviewer instructions and evaluation criteria will be posted later. Reviewers will be asked to primarily judge the work according to the following criteria:
Relevance: Is the submission relevant to health, broadly construed? Does the problem addressed fall into the domains of machine learning and healthcare?
Quality: Is the submission technically sound? Are claims well supported by theoretical analysis or experimental results? Are the authors careful and honest about evaluating both the strengths and weaknesses of their work? Is the work complete rather than a work in progress?
Originality: Are the tasks, methods and results novel? Is it clear how this work differs from previous contributions? Is related work adequately cited to provide context? Does the submission contribute unique data, unique conclusions about existing data, or a unique theoretical or experimental approach?
Clarity: Is the submission clearly written? Is it well-organized? Does it adequately provide enough information for readers to reproduce experiments or results?
Significance: Is the contribution of the work important? Are other researchers or practitioners likely to use the ideas or build on them? Does the work advance the state of the art in a demonstrable way?
Final decisions will be made by Track and Proceedings Chairs, taking into account reviewer comments, ratings of confidence and expertise, and our own editorial judgment. Reviewers will be able to recommend that submissions change tracks or flag submissions for ethical issues, relevance and suitability concerns.
Submissions should be made via the online submission system (Coming soon!). At least one author of each accepted paper is required to register for, attend, and present the work at the conference in order for the paper to appear in the conference proceedings.
Submitted papers must be 8-10 pages (including all figures and tables). Unlimited additional pages can be used for references and additional supplementary materials (e.g. appendices). Reviewers will not be required to read the supplementary materials.
Required Sections
Similar to last year, two sections will be required: 1) Data and Code Availability, and 2) Institutional Review Board (IRB).
Data and Code Availability: This initial paragraph is required. Briefly state what data you use (including citations if appropriate) and whether the data are available to other researchers. If you are not sharing code, you must explicitly state that you are not making your code available. If you are making your code available, then at the time of submission for review, please include your code as supplemental material or as a code repository link; in either case, your code must be anonymized. If your paper is accepted, then you should de-anonymize your code for the camera-ready version of the paper. If you do not include this data and code availability statement for your paper, or you provide code that is not anonymized at the time of submission, then your paper will be desk-rejected. Your experiments later could refer to this initial data and code availability statement if it is helpful (e.g., to avoid restating what data you use).
Institutional Review Board (IRB): This endmatter section is required. If your research requires IRB approval or has been designated by your IRB as Not Human Subject Research, then for the cameraready version of the paper, you must provide IRB information (and at the time of submission for review, you can say that this IRB information will be provided if the paper is accepted). If your research does not require IRB approval, then you must state this to be the case. This section does not count toward the paper page limit.
Submissions to the main conference are considered archival and will appear in the published proceedings of the conference, if accepted. Author notification of acceptance will be provided by the listed date under Important Dates.
Submissions to preprint servers (such as ArXiv or MedRxiv) are allowed while the papers are under review. While reviewers will be encouraged not to search for the papers, you accept that uploading the paper may make your identity known.
The review process is mutually anonymous (aka “double blind”). Your submitted paper, as well as any supporting text or revisions provided during the discussion period, should be completely anonymized (including links to code repositories such as Github). Please do not include any identifying information, and refrain from citing the authors’ own prior work in anything other than third-person. Violations of this anonymity policy at any stage before final manuscript acceptance decisions may result in rejection without further review.
Conference organizers and reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality of submitted material. Upon acceptance, the titles, authorship, and abstracts of papers will be released prior to the conference.
You may not submit papers that are identical, or substantially similar to versions that are currently under review at another conference or journal, have been previously published, or have been accepted for publication. Submissions to the main conference are considered archival and will appear in the published proceedings of the conference if accepted.
An exception to this rule is extensions of workshop papers that have previously appeared in non-archival venues, such as workshops, arXiv, or similar without formal proceedings. These works may be submitted as-is or in an extended form, though they must follow our manuscript formatting guidelines. CHIL also welcomes full paper submissions that extend previously published short papers or abstracts, so long as the previously published version does not exceed 4 pages in length. Note that the submission should not cite the workshop/report and preserve anonymity in the submitted manuscript.
Upon submission, authors will select one or more relevant sub-discipline(s). Peer reviewers for a paper will be experts in the sub-discipline(s) selected upon its submission.
CHIL is committed to open science and ensuring our proceedings are freely available.
Computer software submissions should include an anonymized code link or code attached as supplementary material, licensing information, and provide documentation to facilitate use and reproducibility (e.g., package versions, README, intended use, and execution examples that facilitate execution by other researchers).
Submissions that include analysis on public datasets need to include appropriate citations and data sequestration protocols, including train/validation/test splits, where appropriate. Submissions that include analysis of non-public datasets need to additionally include information about data source, collection sites, subject demographics and subgroups statistics, data acquisition protocols, informed consent, IRB and any other information supporting evidence of adherence to data collection and release protocols. Read our Review Policy.
Authors should discuss ethical implications and responsible uses of their work.