CoRL supplementary material splits into three channels with different rules and different reader guarantees: the appendix (same PDF, optional reading), the supplementary upload (files and the venue's signature overview video), and — after acceptance — external hosting, because the PMLR proceedings pipeline does not take videos at all. Content placed in the wrong channel either never gets seen or violates a rule.
| Channel | 2026 rule | Reader guarantee |
|---|---|---|
| Appendix | Optional; follows references in the same PDF; uncounted against the 8 pages | Reviewers are not required to read it |
| Supplementary file(s) | Encouraged for further details; video ≤ 250 MB (strict), ~3 min suggested | Also optional reading; must be anonymous |
| External links during review | Only if fully anonymous — the URL included | Assume most reviewers won't click |
| Camera-ready / PMLR | No video as supplementary; host video/code/data externally, link from the main text or a project page | Permanent record; plan durable hosting |
The uniform consequence of "optional reading": nothing decision-critical may live outside the 8-page body. The body must stand alone; supplementary material corroborates, it never carries.
For a learned-policy paper the video has a specific evidentiary job — showing that printed success rates correspond to real behavior. Reviewers at this venue watch with a checklist mindset:
# Fit the strict 250 MB cap without shredding quality (H.264 target ~8 Mbps)
ffmpeg -i raw_cut.mp4 -c:v libx264 -preset slow -b:v 8M -maxrate 10M \
-bufsize 16M -vf scale=1920:-2 -an overview_anon.mp4 # -an strips audio
stat -c '%s bytes' overview_anon.mp4 # verify < 250*1024*1024
# Frame-level anonymity spot check: export stills every 5 s and eyeball them
ffmpeg -i overview_anon.mp4 -vf fps=1/5 frames/check_%03d.png
Suggested three-minute arc: task family and setup (20 s) → method in one diagram (20 s) → uncut successes across tasks/objects (90 s) → failures + limitations (30 s) → generalization or sim-to-real side-by-side (20 s).
Because reviewers may skip it, apply a simple contract test to every block you move there: if a reviewer never reads this, does any claim in the body lose its support? If yes, it stays in the body (or the claim softens).
Belongs in the appendix: full hyperparameter and architecture tables, per-task result breakdowns behind body-level aggregates, extra qualitative rollouts, prompt lists for language-conditioned systems, rig photographs, dataset datasheets, extended related work.
Does not belong: the only statement of the evaluation protocol, the only sim-to-real numbers, the definition of the success criterion, or the honest version of a claim the body states more boldly.
corl-submission has the
mechanical sweep).README at the bundle root mapping files to paper tables costs ten minutes
and is the difference between "code provided" and "code checked."On acceptance the channels reorganize (deadline: October 12, 2026, 23:59 AoE for the 2026 cycle):
corl-camera-ready).corl-artifact-evaluation).[ ] Body stands alone with supplementary deleted (contract test passed)
[ ] Video: uncut episodes, labeled speeds, failures included, regimes marked
[ ] Video ≤ 250 MB, audio stripped, frame-level anonymity check done
[ ] Appendix in the same PDF, after references, no load-bearing content
[ ] Code bundle anonymized, README maps files → tables
[ ] External links (if any) anonymous including the URL itself
[ ] Post-acceptance hosting plan drafted (PMLR takes no video)
Caps, encouragement language, and the PMLR handoff are all cycle-specific: re-open https://www.corl.org/contributions/instruction-for-authors for the live year before finalizing the bundle.