ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)

ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)

Conference positioning

ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) is a top computer-science conference venue for human-robot interaction, social robotics, collaborative robots, trust, evaluation, and field studies. It rewards an HRI paper with user study discipline and a clear interaction contribution. Treat this skill as a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool for conference submission strategy, not as a substitute for the current year's CFP, author kit, ethics policy, or submission portal.

Because CS conferences change deadlines, templates, page limits, review workflow, artifact rules, AI-use policy, and rebuttal formats every cycle, always verify the live official instructions before making a submission-ready recommendation. Start from the official source anchor recorded for this venue in ../../resources/conference-roster.md and ../../resources/official-source-map.md.

When to trigger

• The author names HRI / ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction as the target venue.
• A manuscript in human-robot interaction needs a conference-fit read before being formatted or submitted.
• The paper must be re-framed from journal style or arXiv style into a selective CS conference narrative.
• The author needs an evidence-gap, anonymity, artifact, rebuttal, or re-routing diagnosis for this venue.

Scope & topic fit

• Core fit: human-robot interaction, social robotics, collaborative robots, trust, evaluation, and field studies.
• Best submissions make a precise contribution type visible: algorithm, theorem, system, dataset, benchmark, empirical finding, design artifact, tool, or socio-technical analysis.
• The paper should explain why the result matters to HRI's reviewers, not just why it is interesting to the authors' lab or product context.
• Position related work against the most recent conference-cycle papers in this venue and its closest siblings; stale comparisons are a common early-review weakness.
• If the contribution is interdisciplinary, state which part is CS research and which part is domain evidence.

Venue-specific calibration

• Reviewer lens: Treat HRI as a human-robot interaction venue whose reviewers expect the scope and evidence to match its own community. Do not submit a generic CS paper until the introduction names the exact subcommunity, contribution type, and proof or empirical standard.
• Contribution hook to foreground: the venue-specific contribution bar.
• Scope vocabulary to use naturally in the abstract and introduction: human-robot interaction, social robotics, collaborative robots, trust, evaluation, and field studies.
• Distinctive fingerprint for reviewer calibration: human-robot, interaction, social, robotics, collaborative, robots, trust, evaluation, field, studies, venue-specific, contribution, humanrobotinteraction.
• Official anchor domain: humanrobotinteraction.org. Quote annual rules only after opening that source and the current-year CFP/author kit.

Close-neighbor routing guardrail

• Use this profile only when the manuscript's central contribution is genuinely in human-robot interaction and the author can say why HRI reviewers are the primary audience, not merely a convenient deadline.
• Closest roster neighbors to compare before final routing: ieee-rsj-international-conference- on-intelligent-robots-and-systems (IROS), robotics-science-and-systems (RSS), ieee- international-conference-on-robot-and-human-interactive-communication (RO-MAN), ieee- international-conference-on-automation-science-and-engineering (CASE). Break ties by