agentsclimarketplace

Icra topic selection

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/ICRA-Skills/skills/icra-topic-selection

Use when deciding whether a robotics project belongs at ICRA, choosing between a direct ICRA submission and the RA-L journal route with conference presentation, or re-routing to IROS, RSS, CoRL, T-RO, HRI, or CASE based on contribution type, evidence shape, and the embodiment test.From its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icra-topic-selection

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

SKILL.md

6.7 KB, ~1.5k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

ICRA Topic Selection

Route a robotics project before any formatting work begins. ICRA — the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, the flagship conference of the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society (RAS) — is the broadest and largest robotics deadline of the year, but "broad" does not mean "anything with a robot picture." This skill runs two decisions in order: (1) is the contribution ICRA-shaped at all, and (2) if yes, should it travel as a direct conference paper or as an RA-L journal paper carrying a conference-presentation option.

The embodiment test

Ask what breaks if the physical robot is deleted from the paper.

  • If the answer is "nothing — the method is really about images, language, or generic optimization," ICRA reviewers will say so. Route to a vision, ML, or optimization venue and cite robotics as an application.
  • If the answer is "the whole contribution — the method exists because of contact, dynamics, sensing noise, actuation limits, real-time constraints, or task resets," the project is in ICRA territory.
  • Middle cases (learning method evaluated only in simulation) can survive at ICRA, but the burden shifts to the experiments plan; see icra-experiments before committing.

Fit by contribution type

Contribution typeICRA fitStronger alternative to weigh
New manipulation / locomotion / navigation algorithm with hardware trialsCoreRSS if the algorithmic idea is the star
Integrated robot system solving a hard task end to endCoreIROS, field-robotics journals
Robot-learning method, sim-heavy, some real transferGoodCoRL if learning is the entire story
Control / estimation theory with robot validationGoodT-RO or RA-L for longer proofs
Dataset or benchmark for robot tasksGoodRA-L, IJRR for archival datasets
Human-robot interaction with a user studyPossibleHRI conference for study-centric work
Factory / logistics automation, schedulingPossibleCASE, T-ASE
Perception with no downstream robot taskWeakCVPR/ICCV, then a robotics follow-up
Pure RL / optimization theory, no embodimentWeakNeurIPS, ICML, L4DC

Direct ICRA vs RA-L with conference presentation

The RAS ecosystem offers two distinct roads to an ICRA podium, and choosing between them is a real strategic decision, not a formality:

  • Direct ICRA submission. One deadline per year (mid-September for a late-May/June conference), conference peer review, proceedings in IEEE Xplore, 6 pages plus up to 2 pages of references at submission in the 2026 cycle.
  • RA-L (IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters). Year-round submission, first decision targeted within about three months, revise-and-resubmit possible, 6 pages including references with up to 2 extra pages at USD 175 each. Accepted RA-L papers can be transferred, within the posted window and within 270 days of acceptance, for presentation at an upcoming RAS conference such as ICRA — a journal publication plus the same stage.

Decide with these levers:

  1. Clock. Missed September or the result matures in November? RA-L is the only road that still reaches the next ICRA stage.
  2. Revision tolerance. RA-L allows a revision cycle; direct ICRA is accept-or-reject on one shot. Work with one fixable weakness favors RA-L.
  3. CV target. Some fields and hiring committees weight the journal line (RA-L) differently from the conference line (ICRA proceedings). Check what the career context rewards; the presentation looks identical at the venue.
  4. Length. Both cap near 6-8 pages, so length rarely decides; T-RO or IJRR is the route for genuinely long papers.
  5. Dual-submission trap. The same manuscript must never sit in the ICRA conference pipeline and at RA-L simultaneously; that is a rejection offense in both systems.

Quick routing script

Q1 Embodiment: does deleting the robot delete the contribution?
   no  -> route to the parent field's venue; stop.
Q2 Maturity: results solid by early September?
   no  -> RA-L (rolling) or next IROS deadline (typically March).
Q3 One clean contribution statable in 6 pages?
   no  -> T-RO / IJRR long-form, or split the project.
Q4 Is the star the algorithmic idea (RSS), the learning method (CoRL),
   the user study (HRI), or the factory floor (CASE)?
   yes -> weigh that sibling before defaulting to ICRA.
Q5 Otherwise -> direct ICRA; record why in one sentence for the intro.

Lighter tracks at the same conference

Not every result deserves — or needs — the full-paper gauntlet. The ICRA weeks also host workshops with their own paper calls, late-breaking/abstract-style contributions, competitions, and demo slots, each with separate winter/spring deadlines and lighter (often non-archival) review. Correct uses:

  • A promising-but-thin result: workshop now, full paper next September with the workshop feedback baked in.
  • A dataset or tool needing community exposure before the archival paper.
  • A negative or replication result that the main track rarely rewards but a topical workshop will discuss seriously.

Check archival status per call: some workshop papers preclude later "new" submission of the same content, most do not — read the specific call's wording.

Anti-patterns that waste a cycle

  • Submitting a workshop-depth demo as a full paper: ICRA has late-breaking, poster, and workshop tracks better suited to preliminary results — check the current year's calls.
  • Choosing ICRA purely for prestige when the reviewer pool for the subfield (e.g., soft robotics, surgical robotics) is deeper at a specialized venue.
  • Planning "we will add real-robot results during rebuttal" — the classic ICRA pipeline has no author-response phase to add them in (see icra-review-process), so the evidence must be complete at submission.
  • Ignoring that ICRA 2026 moved to double-anonymous review: a framing that leans on "our lab's famous platform" no longer helps and may leak identity.

Output format

[Embodiment test] pass / borderline / fail — <one line>
[Route] direct ICRA / RA-L + presentation option / sibling venue <name>
[Deadline reality] <next reachable deadline and date to verify>
[Contribution type] algorithm / system / learning / theory / dataset / HRI / automation
[Single biggest routing risk] <one line>
[Verify before commitment] current CFP at the ICRA year-site + RA-L information-for-authors page

What ships with it

Read from the repository

Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 325,949. 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.