Skip to content
Back to skills

Iros Related Work

ASecurity

Use when positioning an IROS submission against robotics-systems literature across ICRA, IROS, RSS, CoRL, RA-L, and T-RO, covering the lanes embodied-systems reviewers check, concurrent arXiv work, prior-version overlap, IEEE Xplore archival status, and keeping self-citations anonymous under the double-anonymous cycle.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 12, 2026
ai-agentsgogit

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 12, 2026

npx -y skills add thedixitjain/the-mega-skill-library --skill iros-related-work --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Iros Related Work?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Iros Related Work
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/thedixitjain-iros-related-work/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/thedixitjain-iros-related-work)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: iros-related-work
description: "Use when positioning an IROS submission against robotics-systems literature across ICRA, IROS, RSS, CoRL, RA-L, and T-RO, covering the lanes embodied-systems reviewers check, concurrent arXiv work, prior-version overlap, IEEE Xplore archival status, and keeping self-citations anonymous under the double-anonymous cycle."
category: marketing-and-growth
source_repo: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
source_path: "IROS-Skills/skills/iros-related-work/SKILL.md"
source_url: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/blob/HEAD/IROS-Skills/skills/iros-related-work/SKILL.md
---


# IROS Related Work

Use this to audit novelty and eligibility. Reopen the current CFP for dual-submission, anonymity, and
prior-publication rules before advising authors. At IROS the question a reviewer asks is not only "is
this new?" but "does the paper know the nearest *systems* it resembles and say what it does
differently?"

## Positioning checks

- Separate a **systems contribution** from a component tweak: a new integration, a new capability under a
  constraint, a new reliability level, or a deployment insight — not merely a swapped module.
- Cover the robotics-systems lanes, not just the one nearest your method; a manipulation paper still owes
  the perception and planning neighbors it builds on.
- Treat **IEEE Xplore proceedings, RA-L, and T-RO** as archival; position against them honestly rather
  than around them.
- Cite arXiv and prior workshop versions so **double-anonymous review survives** — never point a reviewer
  to an identity-revealing page or repository.
- Explain overlap with any prior or concurrent version of your own work, and do not submit duplicate
  archival material.

## The lanes robotics reviewers check

| Lane | Typical sources | What IROS reviewers check |
|---|---|---|
| Conference systems | ICRA, prior IROS, RSS, CoRL | Whether the nearest deployed system is compared or explicitly distinguished |
| Robotics journals | RA-L, T-RO, T-ASE, IJRR, Autonomous Robots | Whether mature, revised results are acknowledged, not dodged |
| Perception/learning | CVPR/ICCV, NeurIPS/ICML when a component derives from them | Whether a borrowed component is credited and evaluated in the robotics setting |
| Field/application | Domain venues (field robotics, medical, aerial) | Whether deployment realities and prior fielded systems are cited |

A bibliography citing only your own subfield tells a reviewer the paper may be re-deriving a neighboring
system's idea — a recognizable IROS weakness no amount of demo polish repairs.

## Concurrent-work judgment calls

- Independently concurrent arXiv work: cite neutrally, state the technical difference, and avoid
  priority claims a reviewer cannot verify.
- Your own workshop version: usually non-archival and citable, but verify against the current CFP and
  phrase the citation so anonymity holds.
- When unsure whether a venue counts as archival for dual-submission, declare the overlap in the
  submission form rather than gambling on an editor's read.

## Positioning vignette

Imagine the paper presents a lidar-inertial state estimator that runs on an embedded computer. Its
nearest neighbors: a prior IROS lidar-odometry system it extends, an RA-L fusion method with a heavier
compute footprint, and a CVPR learned-odometry component it borrows a front end from. The novelty
sentence should name all three contrasts — tighter fusion than the IROS predecessor, a smaller compute
budget than the RA-L method, and the learned front end credited and re-evaluated on real field data.

```text
Novelty sentence template:
  "Unlike <nearest system> which <limitation>, our system <capability>
   under <embodiment constraint>, evidenced by <embodied result>."
```

## Output format

```text
[Eligibility] clear / needs declaration / risky
[Closest lanes] <conference/journal/perception/field>
[Nearest 3 systems] <system -> distinction>
[Archival-overlap risk] <none/issues>
[Novelty sentence] <IROS-ready systems contrast>
```

---

**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `IROS-Skills/skills/iros-related-work/SKILL.md`

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.