Predatory Conference Checker

Verify academic conference titles, organizers, and domains against our open evidence-backed registry. Check documented deceptive operations, inspect immutable archived snapshot receipts, or evaluate an unknown call for papers against our Standard Detection Criteria.

Detection Criteria & Heuristics

Standard Detection Criteria

Predatory academic conferences are structured to collect author fees with minimal scholarly contribution. Researchers should scrutinize calls for papers against these eight documented patterns:

Venue Stacking

Ten to thirty unrelated conference topics scheduled simultaneously at the same budget hotel on identical dates.

Fabricated Committees

Distinguished scholars listed as keynote speakers or advisory board members without their consent or knowledge.

Guaranteed Acceptance

Manuscripts accepted within 24 to 72 hours of submission with empty or superficial reviewer comments.

Bulk Email Invitations

Aggressive mass solicitation praising unrelated previous publications and inviting session chairs outside the recipient's field.

Invented Impact Scores

Prominently advertising fraudulent metrics such as “Global Impact Factor” or unverified indexing claims.

Non-Refundable Fee Deadlines

Urgent demands for wire transfers or non-refundable registration fees immediately upon instant acceptance.

Unconfirmed Indexing

Asserting inclusion in Scopus, Web of Science, or IEEE Xplore without official indexing catalog confirmation.

Generic Secretariat Webmail

The conference secretariat operates from generic webmail providers rather than recognized institutional domains.

Self Verification

Researcher Due-Diligence Protocol (6 checkpoints)

Criteria are weighted by academic integrity risk. Confirm each checkpoint below to compute an empirical due-diligence score:

0 of 6 Checked • 0/100 pts

Audit Not Started

Due-diligence score: 0%

Select each criterion you have independently confirmed to calculate a weighted trustworthiness rating.

Do not transfer registration fees or submit unpublished manuscripts without verifying committee members first.

1. Committee & Keynote Identity Verification +25 pts

25 pts • Critical Red Flag

Have you cross-checked the official university faculty websites of at least two listed program chairs or keynote speakers to confirm they actively acknowledge their role with this event?

2. Venue Coherence & Schedule Scrutiny +20 pts

20 pts • High Risk Pattern

Is the conference explicitly booked on the venue/convention calendar, and has the organizer avoided stacking dozens of disparate, unrelated academic disciplines at the same budget hotel?

3. Realistic Peer Review Timeline +20 pts

20 pts • High Risk Pattern

Does the submission timeline allocate standard duration (typically 4 to 12 weeks) for genuine peer review, rather than promising rapid 24-to-72-hour guaranteed acceptance?

4. Independent Indexing Confirmation +15 pts

15 pts • Significant Impact

If inclusion in Scopus, Web of Science, or IEEE Xplore is claimed, have you independently verified the proceedings series in the master list of the respective indexing database?

5. Corporate & Domain Transparency +10 pts

10 pts • Governance Check

Does the organizer provide a verifiable legal corporate identity and headquarters address, rather than hiding behind disposable domains and generic Gmail/webmail contacts?

6. Commercial Terms & Refund Policy +10 pts

10 pts • Commercial Check

Are transparent registration fee schedules, manuscript withdrawal terms, copyright ownership clauses, and fee refund procedures documented before requesting payment?

Open-Access Dataset

Academic Registry of Predatory Conferences & Organizers

Access our full, publicly maintained academic registry with detailed dispute filings, archived snapshot proofs, and multi-venue case studies. The entire structured dataset is archived with a permanent DOI on Zenodo under a CC0 public domain license.

Browse Full Registry

Governance & Standard

Registry Methodology

Our dataset maintains permanent evidence receipts for every flagged organizer and conference. In accordance with open scholarly integrity standards, documentation is preserved openly in our GitHub repository and archived in Zenodo releases.

Immutable Records: Claims are accompanied by Wayback Machine snapshot links or archived dockets to guard against ephemeral web deletion.
Open Dispute Resolution: Organizers may file formal disputes via GitHub pull requests or issues. Verified corrections are published openly alongside original dockets.
Public Domain Data: The registry dataset is distributed under the CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21699200 • Repository: https://github.com/callforpaper/predatory-conferences