The International Journal of Robotics Research (the-international-journal-of-robotics-research)
Journal positioning
The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR), published by SAGE, is a
flagship archival venue for longer-form, conceptually framed robotics research:
foundational methods, extended treatments, and contributions whose value rests on
generality and depth rather than a single working demonstration. The defining
expectation is an idea developed thoroughly — formalized, analyzed, and evaluated
across conditions — that advances how the field thinks about a problem, not only a
system that performs one task. Compared with its sibling
ieee-transactions-on-robotics, IJRR favors the deeper, more general, more
conceptual treatment, while T-RO favors complete and tightly validated results;
route by whether the strength is generality-of-idea or completeness-of-validation.
This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace
the journal's current official author guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the
live IJRR/SAGE author information.
When to trigger
- The author names IJRR for a robotics manuscript with a foundational or
conceptually general contribution and wants a fit/framing check.
- A result must be re-framed from "our system does X" into a general method or
principle, developed and analyzed beyond a single demonstration.
- The author is choosing between IJRR and
ieee-transactions-on-robotics by
depth-and-generality vs. completeness-of-validation.
- The author needs IJRR's depth/generality bar and desk-reject heuristics.
Scope & topic fit
- Foundational methods in planning, control, estimation, learning, and perception
for robots, presented with generality and analysis.
- Manipulation, locomotion, and navigation when the contribution is a principle or
framework that transfers beyond one platform or task.
- Algorithmic and theoretical robotics: complexity, guarantees, representations, and
formal treatments grounded in robotic problems.
- Extended treatments that consolidate, generalize, or deepen a line of work into an
archival reference.
- System and architecture contributions when the design embodies a generalizable
concept, evaluated across conditions, not a one-off demo.
Method & evidence bar
- The central object is a general, well-developed idea: a formalization, method,
or framework whose scope and limits are characterized, not a single tuned result.
- Evaluation should probe generality — across tasks, platforms, parameters, or
conditions — and may combine analysis, simulation, and real-robot experiments.
- Analysis (assumptions, guarantees, complexity, failure modes) is expected where the
contribution is methodological, supporting the claim of generality.
- Experiments matter, but a single impressive demonstration is not sufficient if the
conceptual generality is not established and tested.
- Position the work in the broader arc of the field; the contribution should change
how a problem is approached, not just report a better number.
- Reproducibility: enough detail (and ideally code/data and video) to let others
build on the framework, per current policy.
Structure & house style
- SAGE long-form archival article; IJRR accommodates fuller development than a
letters/short format — match the depth to that scope and re-check current article
types and length policy on the live guide.
- The introduction frames the conceptual problem and the field-level gap, then states
the general contribution; it situates the work in a broad intellectual context.
- The development is thorough: clear formalization, analysis, and a discussion of
scope, assumptions, and limitations.
- Figures and tables support both the concept and its multi-condition evaluation;
a supplementary video supports any hardware demonstration.
- Related work is substantive, reflecting the archival, reference-quality positioning.
Official-submission checklist
- Before giving submission-ready advice, read
../../resources/source-basis.md and
../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the SAGE anchors, then cite
the current IJRR author-guidelines page you checked.
- Search the live site for "International Journal of Robotics Research submission
guidelines" and follow the current SAGE/manuscript-system version.
- Re-check article types, length expectations, and the IJRR/SAGE manuscript format.
- Confirm data/code-availability, video, and reproducibility expectations.
- Re-check competing-interests, funding, author-contribution, and AI-use disclosure
requirements, and open-access options.
- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official
instructions win.
Pre-submission self-check
Common desk-reject triggers
- A single working system or demo with no generalization, analysis, or conceptual framing.
- Incremental result better suited to a shorter, tightly validated format than long-form archival.
- Method asserted to be general but evaluated on one task/platform only.
- Application paper where the robotics idea is incidental and not developed.
- Thin related work and shallow analysis inconsistent with reference-quality positioning.
Re-routing decision
- Complete, tightly validated single contribution →
ieee-transactions-on-robotics.
- Control-theoretic result with guarantees as the core →
ieee-transactions-on-automatic-control / automatica.
- Industrial-robot deployment with hardware-system focus →
ieee-transactions-on-industrial-electronics.
- Medical/surgical-robotics imaging contribution →
ieee-transactions-on-medical-imaging.
- Focused, timely result → a robotics letters venue or conference.
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] The International Journal of Robotics Research
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest robotics subtopics>
[Conceptual contribution] <the general idea/framework in one line>
[Method/evidence] <is generality established and tested, clearing IJRR's depth bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Article type] Long-form archival article
[Official items to re-check] <article type / length / format / data-code-video / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Engineering-Technology-Journal-Skills/skills/the-international-journal-of-robotics-research/SKILL.md
1---2name: the-international-journal-of-robotics-research3description: Use when targeting The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR) or deciding whether a robotics manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the longer-form conceptually-framed-and-general contribution bar, depth-and-generality rigor, the IJRR-vs-T-RO routing, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.4---5
6
7# The International Journal of Robotics Research (the-international-journal-of-robotics-research)
8
9## Journal positioning
10
11The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR), published by SAGE, is a
12flagship archival venue for **longer-form, conceptually framed robotics research**:
13foundational methods, extended treatments, and contributions whose value rests on
14**generality and depth** rather than a single working demonstration. The defining
15expectation is an idea developed thoroughly — formalized, analyzed, and evaluated
16across conditions — that advances how the field thinks about a problem, not only a
17system that performs one task. Compared with its sibling
18`ieee-transactions-on-robotics`, IJRR favors the deeper, more general, more
19conceptual treatment, while T-RO favors complete and tightly validated results;
20route by whether the strength is generality-of-idea or completeness-of-validation.
21This skill is a **fit / venue-selection / re-framing** tool. It does not replace
22the journal's current official author guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the
23live IJRR/SAGE author information.
24
25## When to trigger
26
27- The author names IJRR for a robotics manuscript with a foundational or
28 conceptually general contribution and wants a fit/framing check.
29- A result must be re-framed from "our system does X" into a general method or
30 principle, developed and analyzed beyond a single demonstration.
31- The author is choosing between IJRR and `ieee-transactions-on-robotics` by
32 depth-and-generality vs. completeness-of-validation.
33- The author needs IJRR's depth/generality bar and desk-reject heuristics.
34
35## Scope & topic fit
36
37- Foundational methods in planning, control, estimation, learning, and perception
38 for robots, presented with generality and analysis.
39- Manipulation, locomotion, and navigation when the contribution is a principle or
40 framework that transfers beyond one platform or task.
41- Algorithmic and theoretical robotics: complexity, guarantees, representations, and
42 formal treatments grounded in robotic problems.
43- Extended treatments that consolidate, generalize, or deepen a line of work into an
44 archival reference.
45- System and architecture contributions when the design embodies a generalizable
46 concept, evaluated across conditions, not a one-off demo.
47
48## Method & evidence bar
49
50- The central object is a **general, well-developed idea**: a formalization, method,
51 or framework whose scope and limits are characterized, not a single tuned result.
52- Evaluation should probe generality — across tasks, platforms, parameters, or
53 conditions — and may combine analysis, simulation, and real-robot experiments.
54- Analysis (assumptions, guarantees, complexity, failure modes) is expected where the
55 contribution is methodological, supporting the claim of generality.
56- Experiments matter, but a single impressive demonstration is not sufficient if the
57 conceptual generality is not established and tested.
58- Position the work in the broader arc of the field; the contribution should change
59 how a problem is approached, not just report a better number.
60- Reproducibility: enough detail (and ideally code/data and video) to let others
61 build on the framework, per current policy.
62
63## Structure & house style
64
65- SAGE long-form archival article; IJRR accommodates fuller development than a
66 letters/short format — match the depth to that scope and re-check current article
67 types and length policy on the live guide.
68- The introduction frames the conceptual problem and the field-level gap, then states
69 the general contribution; it situates the work in a broad intellectual context.
70- The development is thorough: clear formalization, analysis, and a discussion of
71 scope, assumptions, and limitations.
72- Figures and tables support both the concept and its multi-condition evaluation;
73 a supplementary video supports any hardware demonstration.
74- Related work is substantive, reflecting the archival, reference-quality positioning.
75
76## Official-submission checklist
77
78- Before giving submission-ready advice, read `../../resources/source-basis.md` and
79 `../../resources/official-source-map.md`; start from the SAGE anchors, then cite
80 the current IJRR author-guidelines page you checked.
81- Search the live site for "International Journal of Robotics Research submission
82 guidelines" and follow the current SAGE/manuscript-system version.
83- Re-check article types, length expectations, and the IJRR/SAGE manuscript format.
84- Confirm data/code-availability, video, and reproducibility expectations.
85- Re-check competing-interests, funding, author-contribution, and AI-use disclosure
86 requirements, and open-access options.
87- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official
88 instructions win.
89
90## Pre-submission self-check
91
92- [ ] The contribution is a general, well-developed idea or framework, not a single tuned demonstration.
93- [ ] Generality is established and tested across tasks/platforms/conditions, not asserted.
94- [ ] Methodological claims are supported by analysis (assumptions, guarantees, complexity, failure modes).
95- [ ] The work is situated in the broad arc of the field and changes how the problem is approached.
96- [ ] Development depth and length fit IJRR's long-form archival format.
97- [ ] Reproducibility detail (and ideally code/data/video) lets others build on the framework.
98
99## Common desk-reject triggers
100
101- A single working system or demo with no generalization, analysis, or conceptual framing.
102- Incremental result better suited to a shorter, tightly validated format than long-form archival.
103- Method asserted to be general but evaluated on one task/platform only.
104- Application paper where the robotics idea is incidental and not developed.
105- Thin related work and shallow analysis inconsistent with reference-quality positioning.
106
107## Re-routing decision
108
109- Complete, tightly validated single contribution → `ieee-transactions-on-robotics`.
110- Control-theoretic result with guarantees as the core → `ieee-transactions-on-automatic-control` / `automatica`.
111- Industrial-robot deployment with hardware-system focus → `ieee-transactions-on-industrial-electronics`.
112- Medical/surgical-robotics imaging contribution → `ieee-transactions-on-medical-imaging`.
113- Focused, timely result → a robotics letters venue or conference.
114
115## Output format
116
117```text
118[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
119[Target] The International Journal of Robotics Research
120[Topic tags] <2–3 closest robotics subtopics>
121[Conceptual contribution] <the general idea/framework in one line>
122[Method/evidence] <is generality established and tested, clearing IJRR's depth bar?>
123[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
124[Article type] Long-form archival article
125[Official items to re-check] <article type / length / format / data-code-video / disclosures>
126[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
127```
128
129---
130
131**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Engineering-Technology-Journal-Skills/skills/the-international-journal-of-robotics-research/SKILL.md`