agentsclimarketplace

The international journal of robotics research

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Engineering-Technology-Journal-Skills/skills/the-international-journal-of-robotics-research

Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. | 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包,从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程,助你快速发论文。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill the-international-journal-of-robotics-research

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Use when targeting The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR) or deciding whether a robotics manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the longer-form conceptually-framed-and-general contribution bar, depth-and-generality rigor, the IJRR-vs-T-RO routing, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

SKILL.md

7.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

The International Journal of Robotics Research (the-international-journal-of-robotics-research)

Journal positioning

The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR), published by SAGE, is a flagship archival venue for longer-form, conceptually framed robotics research: foundational methods, extended treatments, and contributions whose value rests on generality and depth rather than a single working demonstration. The defining expectation is an idea developed thoroughly — formalized, analyzed, and evaluated across conditions — that advances how the field thinks about a problem, not only a system that performs one task. Compared with its sibling ieee-transactions-on-robotics, IJRR favors the deeper, more general, more conceptual treatment, while T-RO favors complete and tightly validated results; route by whether the strength is generality-of-idea or completeness-of-validation. This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current official author guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live IJRR/SAGE author information.

When to trigger

  • The author names IJRR for a robotics manuscript with a foundational or conceptually general contribution and wants a fit/framing check.
  • A result must be re-framed from "our system does X" into a general method or principle, developed and analyzed beyond a single demonstration.
  • The author is choosing between IJRR and ieee-transactions-on-robotics by depth-and-generality vs. completeness-of-validation.
  • The author needs IJRR's depth/generality bar and desk-reject heuristics.

Scope & topic fit

  • Foundational methods in planning, control, estimation, learning, and perception for robots, presented with generality and analysis.
  • Manipulation, locomotion, and navigation when the contribution is a principle or framework that transfers beyond one platform or task.
  • Algorithmic and theoretical robotics: complexity, guarantees, representations, and formal treatments grounded in robotic problems.
  • Extended treatments that consolidate, generalize, or deepen a line of work into an archival reference.
  • System and architecture contributions when the design embodies a generalizable concept, evaluated across conditions, not a one-off demo.

Method & evidence bar

  • The central object is a general, well-developed idea: a formalization, method, or framework whose scope and limits are characterized, not a single tuned result.
  • Evaluation should probe generality — across tasks, platforms, parameters, or conditions — and may combine analysis, simulation, and real-robot experiments.
  • Analysis (assumptions, guarantees, complexity, failure modes) is expected where the contribution is methodological, supporting the claim of generality.
  • Experiments matter, but a single impressive demonstration is not sufficient if the conceptual generality is not established and tested.
  • Position the work in the broader arc of the field; the contribution should change how a problem is approached, not just report a better number.
  • Reproducibility: enough detail (and ideally code/data and video) to let others build on the framework, per current policy.

Structure & house style

  • SAGE long-form archival article; IJRR accommodates fuller development than a letters/short format — match the depth to that scope and re-check current article types and length policy on the live guide.
  • The introduction frames the conceptual problem and the field-level gap, then states the general contribution; it situates the work in a broad intellectual context.
  • The development is thorough: clear formalization, analysis, and a discussion of scope, assumptions, and limitations.
  • Figures and tables support both the concept and its multi-condition evaluation; a supplementary video supports any hardware demonstration.
  • Related work is substantive, reflecting the archival, reference-quality positioning.

Official-submission checklist

  • Before giving submission-ready advice, read ../../resources/source-basis.md and ../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the SAGE anchors, then cite the current IJRR author-guidelines page you checked.
  • Search the live site for "International Journal of Robotics Research submission guidelines" and follow the current SAGE/manuscript-system version.
  • Re-check article types, length expectations, and the IJRR/SAGE manuscript format.
  • Confirm data/code-availability, video, and reproducibility expectations.
  • Re-check competing-interests, funding, author-contribution, and AI-use disclosure requirements, and open-access options.
  • If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.

Pre-submission self-check

  • The contribution is a general, well-developed idea or framework, not a single tuned demonstration.
  • Generality is established and tested across tasks/platforms/conditions, not asserted.
  • Methodological claims are supported by analysis (assumptions, guarantees, complexity, failure modes).
  • The work is situated in the broad arc of the field and changes how the problem is approached.
  • Development depth and length fit IJRR's long-form archival format.
  • Reproducibility detail (and ideally code/data/video) lets others build on the framework.

Common desk-reject triggers

  • A single working system or demo with no generalization, analysis, or conceptual framing.
  • Incremental result better suited to a shorter, tightly validated format than long-form archival.
  • Method asserted to be general but evaluated on one task/platform only.
  • Application paper where the robotics idea is incidental and not developed.
  • Thin related work and shallow analysis inconsistent with reference-quality positioning.

Re-routing decision

  • Complete, tightly validated single contribution → ieee-transactions-on-robotics.
  • Control-theoretic result with guarantees as the core → ieee-transactions-on-automatic-control / automatica.
  • Industrial-robot deployment with hardware-system focus → ieee-transactions-on-industrial-electronics.
  • Medical/surgical-robotics imaging contribution → ieee-transactions-on-medical-imaging.
  • Focused, timely result → a robotics letters venue or conference.

Output format

[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] The International Journal of Robotics Research
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest robotics subtopics>
[Conceptual contribution] <the general idea/framework in one line>
[Method/evidence] <is generality established and tested, clearing IJRR's depth bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Article type] Long-form archival article
[Official items to re-check] <article type / length / format / data-code-video / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.