A limited subset of top-ranked accepted papers will be eligible for fast-track review opportunities by partner journals, as selected by the authors. STAI-X's current partner journals include Journal of the American Statistical Association (JASA); Annals of Applied Statistics (AOAS), Canadian Journal of Statistics, ASA Discoveries, Harvard Data Science Review (HDSR), Genome Research, Genetics, Data Science in Science, and Statistics and Data Science in Imaging. After conference acceptance, authors will be asked to indicate their preferred partner journal for consideration of reviewing an expanded version of their work. Guidance for authors of accepted papers, including journal information and selection criteria, will be provided to authors to help them choose appropriate journals.

Editors of each partner journal will select a limited number of suitable top-ranked papers based on authors' preferences for invitation for fast-track reviews. Journals can ask authors of selected papers to prepare a substantially expanded journal version rather than simply resubmitting the conference paper. Specific journals may have specific additional requirements, including expanding the conference version, for example by including: stronger motivation and positioning, additional methodological details or theory when needed, more comprehensive experiments or data analysis, and a clearer discussion of scientific or practical impact. Journal review processes will be handled by the respective journals independently, and acceptance is not guaranteed.

After the invitation, authors will decide whether or not to submit their paper to the journal. Papers that decide to submit to certain partner journals, such as JASA, AoAS, and ASA Discoveries, must opt out of publication in the STAI-X proceedings and notify STAI-X accordingly. Failure to do so may result in rejection by the partner journal due to dual-submission policies. All accepted papers that do not proceed with the journal submission will be published in the STAI-X Proceedings after the camera-ready stage.

As part of our efforts to improve the consistency, transparency, and efficiency of the review process, authorized AI tools may be used on submissions that have already been made publicly available by the authors (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv) or, at a later stage, camera-ready manuscripts of accepted papers. These systems are designed to (i) assist reviewers by providing structured feedback on their review reports and (ii) generate reproducibility reports that assess submitted code and its consistency with the manuscript for all accepted papers.

The automated feedback provided to reviewers does not introduce new substantive content and is intended to support, rather than replace, human judgment. Reviewers remain fully responsible for their evaluations, and all decisions are made by the program committee. The goal of these tools is to reduce time spent on routine or labor-intensive checks, allowing reviewers to focus more directly on the intellectual contributions and significance of the work. For accepted papers, the AI-assisted reproducibility report will be shared with all authors, who will have the opportunity to revise their manuscripts accordingly.