corl-workflow

CoRL Workflow

CoRL runs one cycle per year on a spring-submit / autumn-decide / November-meet

rhythm. This skill turns the 2026 calendar (verified 2026-07-08 via corl.org,

OpenReview, and the conference's public timeline) into a working plan, including

what a team should be doing right now in each phase.

The 2026 cycle as a reference timeline

| Milestone | CoRL 2026 date | Status on 2026-07-08 |

|---|---|---|

| Abstract registration | May 26, 2026 | passed |

| Paper + supplementary deadline | May 29, 2026 | passed |

| Review period (reviewers, ACs, SACs) | June – early August 2026 | in progress |

| Reviews released / first-round rejections | early August 2026 [exact date 待核实] | upcoming |

| One-page PDF rebuttal due | August 11, 2026, 11:59 PM AoE | upcoming |

| Reviewer–AC discussion window | August 12–19, 2026 | upcoming |

| Decision notification | September 2026 [exact date 待核实] | upcoming |

| Camera-ready to PMLR pipeline | October 12, 2026, 23:59 AoE | upcoming |

| Conference (JW Marriott, Austin, TX) | November 9–12, 2026 (workshops Nov 9) | upcoming |

Every date above is a single cycle's snapshot. The 2027 cycle will publish its own

timeline at the corl.org year-site; nothing here transfers automatically.

Phase playbooks

Now: the submitted-paper quiet period (June–July)

• Do not update the OpenReview PDF — the submission is frozen; focus energy on

experiments you may need for the rebuttal instead.

• Pre-build rebuttal ammunition: the most predictable reviewer asks at CoRL are

more seeds, more evaluation episodes, a missing robot-learning baseline, and a

real-robot check for a sim-heavy paper. Run these before reviews land; the

window between reviews and the August 11 rebuttal deadline is days, not weeks.

• Keep the anonymized project site (if any) untouched and unlinked from any

identity; review is double-anonymous until decisions.

• Decide the fallback venue now (see corl-topic-selection), so a first-round

rejection in early August converts to a resubmission plan the same week.

Reviews land (early August)

• Triage against the first-round rejection rule first: in the 2026 process, a paper

with no score of weak-accept-or-above from any reviewer or the AC is a candidate

for rejection without rebuttal. If you are past that gate, the rebuttal is

live — switch to corl-author-response immediately.

• Map each concern to: (a) already answered in the paper, (b) answerable with a

prepared experiment, (c) requires concession. One page forces this triage anyway.

Rebuttal through decision (mid-August – September)

• Submit the one-page PDF by August 11, 11:59 PM AoE; then remain reachable — the

reviewer–AC discussion (Aug 12–19) can surface follow-ups, and reviewers are

asked to update scores when a rebuttal warrants it.

• Decisions are finalized in SAC–AC meetings and a final SACs–PCs meeting; there is

no author-visible activity in that stage, so use September for the camera-ready

or resubmission branch prep.

Acceptance branch (September – November)

• Camera-ready: 9-page main text (one page more than submission, explicitly to

absorb review feedback), \usepackage[final]{corl_2026}, appendix merged into

the same PDF, due October 12, 23:59 AoE — see corl-camera-ready.

• Remember that reviews and rebuttals of accepted papers are made public: write the

camera-ready knowing the exchange will be readable next to it.

• Book Austin early; plan the poster/talk material and the public code release

(corl-artifact-evaluation) in parallel, not sequentially.

Team calendar template

# corl-cycle-plan.yaml — assign an owner and a date to every row
paper_id: ""
phase_now: post-submission          # update as the cycle advances
rebuttal_prep:
  extra_seeds_run:        {owner: , status: }   # started before reviews arrive
  missing_baseline:       {owner: , status: }
  real_robot_spotcheck:   {owner: , status: }
  one_page_template_ready: {owner: , status: }  # LaTeX skeleton compiled
dates_to_watch:
  reviews_released: "early Aug 2026 (待核实 — watch OpenReview + corl.org)"
  rebuttal_due: "2026-08-11 23:59 AoE"
  discussion: "2026-08-12..19"
  decision: "Sep 2026 (待核实)"
  camera_ready: "2026-10-12 23:59 AoE"
fallback:
  venue: ""                          # decided BEFORE decisions arrive
  required_rework: ""

Planning a CoRL 2027 submission from scratch

Working backward from a late-May deadline (the 2026 pattern; 2027 dates 待核实):

1. T minus 9–12 months — lock the task suite and data-collection plan; hardware

time and teleop data are the long poles in robot-learning projects.

1. T minus 6 months — baselines running end to end; if a claim needs

sim-to-real evidence, the real-robot rig must exist by now, not in April.

1. T minus 3 months — full evaluation protocol frozen (seeds, episodes, task

splits — corl-experiments); start the paper with the Limitations section

drafted early, since it is mandatory and counts inside the 8 pages.

1. T minus 1 month — supplementary video storyboarded and shot

(corl-supplementary); anonymization sweep of paper, video, and any site.

1. Deadline week — abstract registration a few days before the paper deadline

(2026 spacing: May 26 vs May 29); final OpenReview form checks per

corl-submission.

Risks specific to this venue's shape

• The rebuttal window is short and fixed; teams that start experiments after

reviews arrive routinely miss it. Prepare in the quiet period.

• The single annual deadline means a miss costs a full year — hold the routing

discussion (corl-topic-selection) before investing deadline-week effort.

• Hardware fails on deadline schedules: keep one robot-day of slack per claimed

real-robot table in the final month.

Reconfirm every date at https://www.corl.org/ (2026 cycle) or the 2027 year-site

before acting; this file records the 2026-07-08 state of knowledge.