| name | corl-submission |
| description | Use when preparing or auditing a CoRL OpenReview submission — the corl_2026 LaTeX template, the 8-page main text with a mandatory Limitations section counted inside it, uncounted references and appendix, the supplementary file and 250 MB video, double-anonymous rules, abstract registration, and dual-submission checks. |
CoRL Submission
This is the pre-upload audit for a CoRL paper. The numbers below are the CoRL 2026
requirements as read on 2026-07-08 from the official Instruction for Authors and
Call for Papers (corl.org); the 2026 deadline has passed, so apply this skill to a
2027-cycle draft after re-opening the new year's pages — CoRL re-issues its
instructions annually and has changed page accounting between cycles.
The 2026 package, itemized
| Element | 2026 rule | Notes |
|---|
| Platform | OpenReview, group robot-learning.org/CoRL/2026/Conference | Profile + conflicts needed for every author |
| Abstract registration | May 26, 2026 | Separate, earlier than the paper |
| Paper deadline | May 29, 2026 | Deadline clock/timezone wording 待核实 per cycle |
| Main text | 8 pages, including a mandatory Limitations section | Limitations counts toward the limit — budget for it |
| Not counted | Acknowledgments, references, optional appendix | Appendix rides in the same PDF |
| Template | corl_2026 LaTeX class | Camera-ready later flips to [final] mode |
| Review model | Double-anonymous | Applies to paper, supplementary, and any linked site |
| Supplementary | Encouraged; video ≤ 250 MB (strict), ~3 min suggested | See corl-supplementary for content strategy |
What makes the CoRL audit different
Two venue-specific traps dominate desk problems here, and neither exists in the
same form at neighboring conferences:
- The Limitations section is not optional and not free. The 2026 instructions
require every submission to include a Limitations section — limiting
assumptions, failure modes, and how they might be addressed — and it counts
inside the 8 pages. Drafts imported from NeurIPS-style templates (where such
sections often sit outside the limit) silently overflow. Audit the page budget
with Limitations present, not as an afterthought.
- Project pages leak identity. Robot-learning papers habitually ship a
project website with videos. During review, any link that identifies an author,
lab, or institution is an anonymity violation under the 2026 instructions —
this includes the URL itself (
lab-name.github.io fails even if the page is
scrubbed). Use an anonymous hosting pattern or put the video in the
supplementary upload instead.
Anonymity sweep for a robot-learning paper
Beyond the standard items (author block, acknowledgments, metadata, third-person
self-citation), sweep the modalities specific to this field:
- Video frames: lab signage, whiteboards, badge lanyards, reflections in glossy
robot shells, distinctive lab furniture that appears in your prior papers.
- Robot livery: stickers, hostnames on monitors, custom end-effectors already
associated with your group.
- Dataset paths burned into figures or config listings (
/home/<user>/...).
- Repository and W&B links in code snippets or appendix listings.
pdftotext main.pdf - | grep -nEi 'github\.io|github\.com|wandb|acknowledg|our (lab|group|university)' | head
pdfinfo main.pdf | grep -Ei 'author|creator|producer'
grep -RnEi 'hostname|/home/|api_key' supplementary/code/ | head
stat -c '%n %s' supplementary/video.mp4
pdftotext main.pdf - | grep -ci 'limitation'
Page-budget strategy under the 8+Limitations rule
- Write the Limitations section early and hold it at a fixed budget (half a page is
a common shape); do not let it become the compression victim of deadline week.
- Overflow goes to the appendix — reviewers are not obligated to read it, so only
non-load-bearing detail (full hyperparameter tables, extra rollouts, per-task
breakdowns beyond the headline) may live there.
- Do not fight the template: class-file modifications, margin edits, and squeezed
float spacing are detectable and read as rule-testing to ACs.
Form fields and policy checks
- Abstract registration first. The 2026 cycle separated abstract (May 26) and
paper (May 29); a missed abstract registration forecloses the submission
entirely. Register with a stable title and author list.
- Dual submission: the paper must not be under review elsewhere; the
fast-moving robot-learning arXiv culture makes this an easy accident when a
workshop version is circulating — check the current CFP's exact scope wording
each cycle.
- GenAI policy: the 2026 Instruction for Authors added a generative-AI policy
(announced April 2026); its exact disclosure requirements are 待核实 in this
pack — read that section verbatim before submitting.
- Subject areas / keywords on the form drive reviewer assignment in a small,
specialized pool; pick the subfield your harshest competent critic works in.
Pre-upload checklist
[ ] Abstract registered by the abstract deadline (title/authors stable)
[ ] Main text <= 8 pages WITH Limitations section included and substantive
[ ] References + appendix after main text, same PDF, uncounted
[ ] corl_2026 template unmodified; compiles with no page-limit tricks
[ ] Anonymity sweep passed: text, figures, video frames, links, metadata
[ ] Supplementary video <= 250 MB, ~3 min, anonymized end to end
[ ] Code/data (if included) scrubbed of identities, paths, and keys
[ ] OpenReview form: authors, conflicts, keywords, abstract synced with PDF
[ ] Dual-submission status confirmed with every coauthor in writing
[ ] GenAI-policy disclosure handled per the current instructions [待核实]
Re-verify each cycle
Page accounting (the 2026 camera-ready got a 9th page; earlier cycles differed),
the Limitations rule, video caps, the GenAI policy, and deadline clock conventions
are all chair-set and cycle-volatile. The controlling sources are
https://www.corl.org/contributions/call-for-papers and
https://www.corl.org/contributions/instruction-for-authors for the live year —
open both before trusting any number in this file.
