Can the conference speaker finder tell me who is available?

No, and this is the limit worth being explicit about. It reads the call for papers or session description you upload and returns researchers from the public literature whose work sits close to it, each with a stated reason. Nothing in a publication record says who is free on your dates, who accepts invitations, who speaks well, or who has a travel budget. It widens the pool the committee chooses from, which is the part that is hard to do from memory.

How do we stop inviting the same speakers every year?

Keep a written record of past speakers with dates and topics, since most repetition is memory failure rather than choice, and build a long candidate list before the committee starts deciding. A committee choosing from recall converges on its own network every time. The full method is in our guide to finding conference speakers .

What should a speaker invitation contain?

The dates and city in the subject line, one specific sentence on why this person, what the talk should do in the programme, and a scannable block of practical terms: slot length, audience size and composition, what is covered including any honorarium, whether remote is possible, and the deadlines. Our invitation templates cover a keynote and an invited session talk.

Is CheckMyManuscript useful for a conference?

For the written outputs rather than for the event itself. Submitted abstracts and proceedings papers are manuscripts, and the checker validates abstract completeness, structure, reference matching and formatting. It does not review scientific merit, so it is not a substitute for your reviewing process and cannot help you select talks.

Where do the candidate names come from?

From OpenAlex, an open catalogue of published research. Only public bibliographic records are used: authorship, affiliation, topic and date. No private profiles, no social networks, no scraped pages, and no contact details at any point.

For Conference Organizers

For the person building a programme: where candidate speakers come from, how to balance the sessions, and how to write an invitation a researcher can answer in one reading.

Check my manuscript, it's free

No account required · Results in ~5 minutes · PDF and Word

Published August 14, 2026

What a programme committee needs, and what we publish

A conference organiser is choosing speakers, usually from memory, usually under time pressure, and usually with a budget that constrains who can realistically come. That produces two recurring outcomes: the same names appear across editions, and the programme has overlaps nobody noticed until the schedule was published. What we publish addresses the first half of the problem, which is the size of the candidate pool, and the invitation that follows it. We are not an event agency and not a speaker bureau. We do not represent speakers, we hold no availability or fee information, we take no commission, and none of our tools contacts anyone. Every choice and every message is the committee's.

What is here for a programme committee

Four sources of candidates

The recent literature read as people, past programmes and adjacent conferences, the first authors around the senior names, and communities outside your usual reading.

Programme balance

Laying the draft out at once to catch duplicated talks, mixing career stages within sessions, and keeping a ranked reserve list before the first invitation.

Diversity as process

What the published work on speaker imbalance points at: committee composition, pool size before decisions, and removing the barriers that generate declines.

Two invitation templates

A keynote and an invited session talk, annotated, plus the eight facts a speaker needs before they can answer.

Verification before inviting

Whether they still work on the topic, evidence of speaking ability, your own record of past speakers, and the practical constraints.

A wider pool from your call

The conference speaker finder reads a call for papers or track description and suggests researchers publishing on that theme, with a reason each. It says nothing about availability and contacts nobody.

Checks relevant to this topic

Part of our 95 automated checks

Abstract structure

For submitted abstracts and proceedings papers: background, objective, methods, results and conclusion.

Structure and section completeness

Missing sections, ordering and IMRaD compliance in a proceedings manuscript.

Reference completeness

Every in-text citation matched to a bibliography entry.

Formatting consistency

Headings, figure and table numbering, and basic submission requirements.

The practical edge your peers already use

Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.

I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.

Ilyass

Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.

Manon

Master's Student in Speech Therapy

I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.

Afonso

PhD Candidate, UFPE

It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.

Félix

Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.

Oleg

Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University