AI-assisted abstract review uses software to support defined parts of a conference review process, such as submission checks, topic classification, reviewer assignment and advisory analysis. It should not replace expert assessment of scientific merit or a programme committee’s final decision.
That distinction matters when a university, scholarly society or research conference receives hundreds or thousands of submissions. The administrative burden is real, but so are the consequences of a poor reviewer match, an exposed identity, a missed conflict of interest or an unexplained rejection.
The useful question is not, “Can AI review abstracts?” It is, “Which tasks can it support, who checks the output and what evidence will the committee keep?”