arXiv Endorsement Strategy for Individuals

arXiv Endorsement Strategy for Individuals | Generated by AI

Home 2026.06

Question: I need an arXiv endorsement to submit to cs.AI. Who can endorse me, and what’s the practical path to get one?

Answer:

The mechanics first, then the realistic strategy for someone in your exact situation (no academic affiliation, self-taught, building in public).

The hard constraints

An endorser must:

Have submitted 3+ papers to an eligible cs.* category (the long list including cs.AI, cs.LG, cs.CL, cs.SE, etc.)
Those papers submitted >3 months ago and <5 years ago (a specific recency window — a prolific author from 2015 doesn’t qualify if they’ve gone quiet)
Be in good standing as an arXiv submitter

You forward the unique code from your email to them; they enter it. They’re vouching that your paper is plausibly appropriate for the category — not peer-reviewing it. It’s a low bar of trust, but it requires a real human who qualifies.

How to find qualified endorsers (the AI-native way)

Don’t guess. arXiv exposes endorsement eligibility directly. The verification trick from the instructions: on any abstract page, the “Which of the authors of this article can endorse?” link tells you exactly who qualifies. So the workflow is:

Find recent (last 1–3 years) cs.AI/cs.LG papers closely related to your submission’s topic.
Check the endorse link to confirm which author qualifies.
Reach out to that specific author.

You can automate the discovery side. arXiv has a clean API:

# Find recent cs.AI papers matching your topic keywords
curl -s "http://export.arxiv.org/api/query?search_query=cat:cs.AI+AND+all:nanoGPT&sortBy=submittedDate&sortOrder=descending&max_results=20" \
  | grep -E '<id>|<title>|<name>|<published>'

Or in Python to extract author + date and filter to the eligibility window:

import urllib.request, feedparser, datetime as dt

def find_endorsers(query, want=30):
    url = ("http://export.arxiv.org/api/query?"
           f"search_query={query}&sortBy=submittedDate"
           f"&sortOrder=descending&max_results={want}")
    feed = feedparser.parse(urllib.request.urlopen(url).read())
    now = dt.datetime.now(dt.timezone.utc)
    for e in feed.entries:
        pub = dt.datetime(*e.published_parsed[:6], tzinfo=dt.timezone.utc)
        age_days = (now - pub).days
        # endorser needs a paper >3mo and <5yr old; recent active authors are best bets
        flag = "active" if 90 < age_days < 1825 else ""
        authors = ", ".join(a.name for a in e.authors)
        print(f"{pub.date()} [{flag}] {e.title.strip()[:60]}")
        print(f"    {authors}")

find_endorsers("cat:cs.AI+AND+all:large+language+model")

The author list from the API gives you candidates; the per-paper endorse link confirms eligibility (the API doesn’t expose endorsement status directly, so that last check is manual).

The realistic strategy for you

The instructions hint at the social reality: “find an endorser who is connected with you.” You have no thesis advisor. So your leverage is your public work, which is actually substantial — 8,000 notes, 400 posts, real model-training experience. Use it:

Pick the right category. cs.AI is harder to endorse into than you’d think because it’s broad and moderators reclassify aggressively. If your paper is about training/architecture, cs.LG is often a better fit and has a much larger pool of recent, active endorsers. If it’s NLP/LLM-specific, cs.CL. Match the category to where your actual likely-endorsers publish.
Co-author with someone already qualified. This is the cleanest path and the one most people miss. If you collaborate with anyone who has an arXiv track record — even loosely — they endorse trivially and the connection is genuine. Given your network (ex-startup, bank AI team, open-source contributors), there may already be someone one hop away.
Cold outreach that respects their time. Authors get spammed with endorsement requests. The ones that work: short, specific, show you read their work, link your paper draft and your public track record so you’re clearly not a crank. Something like — “I’m submitting [title] on [topic], closely related to your [paper]. I’m an independent researcher (not affiliated); here’s the draft and my work at lzwjava.github.io. Would you consider endorsing for cs.LG?” Attach the draft. The draft quality does the persuading.
arXiv’s own escape hatch. If you genuinely can’t find an endorser, email arXiv moderation explaining your situation with a link to the paper. They sometimes review directly. It’s slow and not guaranteed, but it exists.

One honest caveat worth internalizing: endorsement is necessary but not sufficient. Moderators reject/reclassify independent submissions that read as non-scholarly. So the same effort that gets you an endorser — a tight, well-structured paper with real results — is also what survives moderation. The draft is the bottleneck, not the endorsement.

References:

Back Donate