ICRA Topic Selection
SkillDev toolsUse 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.
Instructions available. Your AI can read the instructions. Execution depends on the setup they require.
Account requirements not reviewed. Check the skill instructions before use; ahel provides instructions and does not run this skill.
Add ahel to your AI once: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude Code or Codex. Then ask it to use this.
Then ask your AI: use the ICRA Topic Selection skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills in ICRA-Skills/skills/icra-topic-selection/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
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-experimentsbefore committing.
Fit by contribution type
| Contribution type | ICRA fit | Stronger alternative to weigh |
|---|---|---|
| New manipulation / locomotion / navigation algorithm with hardware trials | Core | RSS if the algorithmic idea is the star |
| Integrated robot system solving a hard task end to end | Core | IROS, field-robotics journals |
| Robot-learning method, sim-heavy, some real transfer | Good | CoRL if learning is the entire story |
| Control / estimation theory with robot validation | Good | T-RO or RA-L for longer proofs |
| Dataset or benchmark for robot tasks | Good | RA-L, IJRR for archival datasets |
| Human-robot interaction with a user study | Possible | HRI conference for study-centric work |
| Factory / logistics automation, scheduling | Possible | CASE, T-ASE |
| Perception with no downstream robot task | Weak | CVPR/ICCV, then a robotics follow-up |
| Pure RL / optimization theory, no embodiment | Weak | NeurIPS, 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:
- Clock. Missed September or the result matures in November? RA-L is the only road that still reaches the next ICRA stage.
- 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.
- 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.
- Length. Both cap near 6-8 pages, so length rarely decides; T-RO or IJRR is the route for genuinely long papers.
- 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
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 1k
- Forks
- 155
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Item type
- skill
- Key
icra-topic-selection- Source
- github.com/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills
github.com/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills
Related picks
Skill · brycewang-stanford
The pick for Academic03-academic-writing
Skill · 24kchengye
The pick for Academicteach
Skill · mattpocock
More in Dev toolsimplement
Skill · mattpocock
More in Dev toolsponytail
Skill · dietrichgebert
More in Dev toolscaveman
Skill · juliusbrussee
More in Dev tools