Icra Supplementary

ICRA Supplementary

At most ML conferences "supplementary" means an unlimited appendix PDF. ICRA has no such thing: the 2026-cycle rules cap the reviewed document at 6 content pages plus 2 reference-only pages, with no appendix upload. What ICRA has instead is the video attachment — a robotics-native evidence format with hard specs (≤ 180 seconds, ≤ 20 MB, mpeg/mp4/mpg in 2026) and its own submission windows. This skill treats the video as the serious scientific artifact it is.

The self-containment rule

Because reviewers are not obligated to open anything beyond the PDF, and because there is no appendix:

• Every load-bearing definition, equation, protocol detail, and result must be in the 6 pages. The video may demonstrate; it must never be the only place a claim is supported.
• External links (project page, code) are pointers to optional corroboration. Under the double-anonymous policy they must also be anonymized or omitted.
• The test: delete the video and all links mentally — does the paper still prove its claims? If no, restructure the body, not the supplement.

What the video is for

Robotics reviewers watch the attachment early, often before reading past the abstract. It answers questions text cannot:

Storyboard for 180 seconds

0:00-0:10  title card: paper title only (no authors — double-anonymous)
0:10-0:30  task + platform in one wide continuous shot
0:30-1:30  core capability: 3-5 uncut executions, varied instances,
           on-screen labels: condition, trial number, 1× speed
1:30-2:10  the money comparison: baseline vs method, same task instance,
           side by side if possible
2:10-2:35  a failure case, honestly labeled with the taxonomy category
           from the paper's failure table
2:35-3:00  generalization montage (may be sped up — label "4×"),
           closing card pointing to the paper, nothing else

Rules the storyboard encodes: label every speed change (silent speed-ups are treated as deception when caught); prefer uncut takes over montage for the core claim; synchronize the video's trial conditions with the paper's tables so a reviewer can cross-reference; show failure deliberately — it converts the video from advertisement into evidence.

Meeting 20 MB without looking like 2005

180 seconds under 20 MB means roughly 900 kbps total — tight but workable:

• Encode H.264 (in an mp4 container per the allowed formats), 720p, high-profile two-pass; drop the audio track entirely (narration goes into captions, which also survive muted review viewing and avoid voice de-anonymization issues).
• Avoid 60 fps; robotics motion reads fine at 24-30 fps and halves bitrate.
• Static title cards and captions compress to nearly nothing; noisy handheld footage does not — use a tripod, lock exposure.
• Verify the final file on the actual spec: duration ≤ 180 s, size ≤ 20 MB, extension among the allowed three, plays in a stock player.

Anonymization of footage

Video leaks identity faster than text (2026-cycle double-anonymous rules):

• Sweep frames for lab posters, door signs, safety-vest logos, license plates, reflections in glass, and named equipment tags; blur or reshoot.
• No voice-over (voiceprints identify); no bystanders' faces without masking.
• Strip container metadata (ffmpeg -map_metadata -1 on the final pass) — the encoder tag can carry a username.

Project pages and external links

A public project page is standard robotics practice after acceptance but a liability during double-anonymous review:

• If the page already exists (earlier arXiv release), do not link it from the submission; reviewers finding it on their own is tolerated, you leading them there is a violation pattern.
• An anonymized mirror (no lab name in domain or footer) may be linked if the cycle's rules permit external material at all — reread the current CFP.
• Plan the public page for acceptance week: paper, final video, artifact link, BibTeX with the IEEE Xplore DOI (icra-camera-ready stages this flip).

Windows and logistics

In the 2026 cycle videos were accepted only during two windows (Aug 5-Sep 9 and Sep 17-22, 2025, 23:59 Pacific) — note the second window closes after the paper deadline, a grace period for editing but not for shooting. Bank raw footage throughout the experimental campaign (icra-reproducibility ties clips to trial logs); deadline-week shooting produces both worse videos and worse anonymity discipline. Verify the current year's windows and specs on the year-site before scheduling the edit.

Pre-upload checklist

1. Paper passes the self-containment test with video deleted.
2. Storyboard beats present: uncut core, labeled speeds, comparison, failure.
3. Trial conditions on screen match table conditions in the paper.
4. Spec check: ≤ 180 s, ≤ 20 MB, allowed container, plays everywhere.
5. Anonymity sweep of frames, captions, metadata complete.
6. Upload inside the posted window; confirmation archived.

Output format

[Self-containment] pass / fail — claims living only in video: <list>
[Storyboard audit] uncut-core / speed-labels / comparison / failure: y/n each
[Spec] <s> s, <MB> MB, <container> — compliant: y/n
[Anonymity] frame sweep, captions, metadata: clean / leaks: <list>
[Window] target window <dates> — footage ready by: <date>
[Cross-reference] video trials ↔ paper tables consistent: y/n

Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → ICRA-Skills/skills/icra-supplementary/SKILL.md