Event owner lens
Use this record to benchmark whether a comparable event makes the work after the room visible. The score is 39/100, so the next move is to benchmark the weakest pillars before repeating the format.
applied learning or working session agenda analysis
Wcbm Workshop 2024
This applied learning or working session in Academic / Research / Science shows 35 visible agenda rows from wcbm-workshop.github.io and scores 39/100: a thin but inspectable design signal. The clearest public signals sit in Participation Architecture and Future-of-Work Fit; the main limits are Follow Through and Network Design. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Network design, and Learning transfer. The public record does not show follow-up or tracking, so the score should be read as design intent... A practical reading: For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an applied learning or working session, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and future-of-work fit and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence. This page is an original public-evidence analysis, not a copy of the source agenda or an endorsement of the event. The score places the visible agenda in the thin outcome architecture band. The strongest visible pillars are Participation Architecture, Future-of-Work Fit, and Learning Transfer; the thinnest visible pillars are Follow Through, Network Design, and Problem Specificity. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Network design, and Learning transfer. The extracted agenda preview includes 64 visible rows. The most common formats are Workshop, Unknown, and Presentation; the most common inferred purposes are Unknown, Knowledge Transfer, and Co Creation.
Eight-pillar fingerprint
Hover any pillar to see what it measures and, where it scored low, what the agenda is missing.
Participation Architecture?60
Participation Architecture - 60/100. Participant work, contribution, interaction, and alternatives to passive broadcast.
Follow Through?5
Follow Through - 5/100. Owners, dates, commitments, progress checks, and accountability after the room.Missing: Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
Problem Specificity?41
Problem Specificity - 41/100. A clear costly problem, objective, decision, or performance target.Missing: Name the costly problem, decision, or performance target the gathering is meant to move.
Personalization?43
Personalization - 43/100. Role, path, goal, preparation, or connection tailoring for participants.
Network Design?16
Network Design - 16/100. Structured weak ties, bridge-building, mixers, and relationship persistence.Missing: Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
Learning Transfer?45
Learning Transfer - 45/100. Applied practice, feedback, workplace use, refreshers, and 30-90 day transfer.
Evidence Maturity?45
Evidence Maturity - 45/100. Baseline, comparison, follow-up, isolation, and attribution confidence.
Future-of-Work Fit?57
Future-of-Work Fit - 57/100. Value against time, hybrid reality, accessibility, AI, and meeting load.
Fix the gaps
Field-tested exercises matched to this agenda's weakest pillars, from the exercise library.
Follow Through (5/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Mental Toughness Workshop • WorkshopBank · 15% Solutions • WorkshopBank · Network Patches
Network Design (16/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Fun Trust-Building Group Game for Team Connection - Izzat... · Exciting Group Trust Activity for Building Confidence... · PFP: September 2005
Problem Specificity (41/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: 0 - “Two Person Scene” Theory · Challenge Axis - Knowmium: The Un-Training Consultancy · Fist to Five • WorkshopBank
Agenda Preview
The actual agenda we captured. Every block is classified by format and purpose. Open any block to see how we read it; the colored edge shows whether it is participant work, broadcast, logistics, or a showcase.
Room vs wrapper
33 percent of the 64 classified blocks put participants to work; the rest broadcast, show, or handle logistics. That mix is what drives the participation score.
Participant workBroadcastShowcaseLogistics
all eventWCBM WorkshopWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshop on Whole-body Control and Bimanual Manipulation: Applications in Humanoids and BeyondWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventUnfortunately, this workshop will be in-person only since we cannot provide a live streaming nor recording.WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshop scheduleWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
8:30 - 8:40Opening RemarkPresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
8:40 - 9:05Jitendra Malik (UC Berkeley)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
9:05 - 9:30Yuke Zhu (UT Austin, NVIDIA)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
9:30 - 9:55Manuel Galliker (1X Technologies)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
9:55 - 10:20Vikash Kumar (CMU)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
10:20 - 11:00Coffee Break, Posters, Robot DemosBreakShowcase+
Format · LogisticsBreakA pacing or recovery block between sessions.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
11:00 - 11:20Xingxing Wang (Unitree)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
11:20 - 11:40Quentin Rouxel on behalf of Serena Ivaldi (Inria)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
11:40 - 12:00Ziwen Zhuang (Tsinghua University)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
12:00 - 13:4513:45 - 14:10 Chelsea Finn (Stanford, PI)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
13:45 - 14:10Chelsea Finn (Stanford, PI)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
14:10 - 14:35Moritz Baecher (Disney Research)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
14:35 - 15:00Poster SpotlightPoster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
15:30 - 15:55Jonathan Hurst (Oregon State Univ., Agility Robotics)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
15:55 - 16:20Xiaolong Wang (UCSD)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
16:20 - 16:40Toru Lin (UC Berkeley)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
16:40 - 17:05Scott Kuindersma (Boston Dynamics)PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
17:05 - 18:00Panel Discussion (with Jitendra Malik, Yuke Zhu, Jonathan Hurst, Chelsea Finn, Scott Kuindersma)PanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
18:00 - 18:10Closing RemarksClosingOrientation+
Format · BroadcastClosingFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventPostersPoster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshop PostersWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventPoster SpotlightsPoster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshop OrganizersWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventThe WCBM workshop will use OpenReview as the review platform.WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWCBM WorkshopWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventHome About Schedule Invited speakers Organization Call for papersUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventWorkshop on Whole-body Control and Bimanual Manipulation: Applications in Humanoids and BeyondWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventUnfortunately, this workshop will be in-person only since we cannot provide a live streaming nor recording.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshop scheduleWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
8:30 - 8:40Opening RemarkUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
8:40 - 9:05Jitendra Malik (UC Berkeley)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
9:05 - 9:30Yuke Zhu (UT Austin, NVIDIA)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
9:30 - 9:55Manuel Galliker (1X Technologies)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
9:55 - 10:20Vikash Kumar (CMU)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
10:20 - 11:00Coffee Break, Posters, Robot DemosPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:00 - 11:20Xingxing Wang (Unitree)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:20 - 11:40Quentin Rouxel on behalf of Serena Ivaldi (Inria)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:40 - 12:00Ziwen Zhuang (Tsinghua University)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
12:00 - 13:4513:45 - 14:10 Chelsea Finn (Stanford, PI)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
13:45 - 14:10Chelsea Finn (Stanford, PI)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
14:10 - 14:35Moritz Baecher (Disney Research)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
14:35 - 15:00Poster SpotlightPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
15:30 - 15:55Jonathan Hurst (Oregon State Univ., Agility Robotics)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
15:55 - 16:20Xiaolong Wang (UCSD)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
16:20 - 16:40Toru Lin (UC Berkeley)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
16:40 - 17:05Scott Kuindersma (Boston Dynamics)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
17:05 - 18:00Panel Discussion (with Jitendra Malik, Yuke Zhu, Jonathan Hurst, Chelsea Finn, Scott Kuindersma)PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
18:00 - 18:10Closing RemarksClosing RemarksOrientation+
Format · BroadcastClosing RemarksClosing framing from the stage. Wraps the event, not participatory.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPostersPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshop PostersWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventCheck out our workshop papers at OpenReview: <https://openreview.net/group?id=robot-learning.org/CoRL/2024/Workshop/WCBM>WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPoster Spotlights:Poster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventTime Your Rewards: Learning Temporally Consistent Rewards from a Single Video Demonstration. Huaxiaoyue Wang, William Huey, Anne Wu, Yoav Artzi, Sanjiban ChoudhuryDemoShowcase+
Format · Participant workDemoA hands-on or applied walkthrough that invites attendee questions and direct engagement.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe Role of Domain Randomization in Training Diffusion Policies for Whole-Body Humanoid Control. Oleg Kaidanov, Firas Al-Hafez, Yusuf Süvari, Boris Belousov, Jan PetersTrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventLatent Action Pretraining From Videos. Seonghyeon Ye, Joel Jang, Byeongguk Jeon, Se June Joo, Jianwei Yang, Baolin Peng, Ajay Mandlekar, Reuben Tan, Yu-Wei Chao, Bill Yuchen Lin, Lars Liden, Kimin Lee, Jianfeng Gao, Luke Zettlemoyer, Dieter Fox, Minjoon SeoTrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshop OrganizersWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventEmpirical paper: Submissions should focus on presenting original research, case studies or novel implementations in the fields related to the workshop (see potential topics below).WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe WCBM workshop will use OpenReview as the review platform.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshopsWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
The Full Reading
Why It Ranks This Way +
Calibrated from GES design 39/100 and verified 39/100 with no fourth-loop cap.
Reader Takeaway. For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an applied learning or working session, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and future-of-work fit and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence.
Strongest signals: Participation Architecture, Future-of-Work Fit, and Learning Transfer. Weakest signals: Follow Through, Network Design, and Problem Specificity.
How This Agenda Could Improve +
- Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
- Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
- Name the costly problem, decision, or performance target the gathering is meant to move.
Fastest next move: Add named owners, dated next steps, and a visible continuation path before treating the event as outcome-ready.
Role-Specific Reading +
Sponsor lens
Look beyond exposure. Strong sponsor value would show qualified interaction, problem work, buyer learning, customer evidence, or follow-up. The practical sponsor move is to look for structured introductions, buyer-seller fit, and relationship persistence.
Designer lens
The agenda is useful as a pattern sample from wcbm-workshop.github.io. Redesign attention should go first to the lowest-scoring pillars; in practice, turn the thinnest agenda blocks into participant work.
Executive lens
Treat the visible agenda as an operating plan. The executive move is to require owners, dates, and evidence before treating the event as strategic. If owners, proof, and follow-through are not visible, the public record does not yet prove strategic movement.
Aggregator lens
Treat the source URL as evidence, not decoration. The data-product move is to label the source boundary clearly before ranking the record before ranking or syndicating the record.
What GES Means Here +
The Gathering Effectiveness Score is a strict 0-100 public-evidence reading of the agenda across eight pillars. It rewards visible participant work, follow-through, transfer, network design, and proof mechanisms more than polish, speaker fame, attendance, or satisfaction.
Visible mechanisms: Participant work, Network design, Learning transfer.
Evidence boundary: Scores reflect visible agenda/source evidence and should not be read as proof of causal event impact.
Limitations, Score Caps, and Review Flags +
Limitations
- No visible follow-up, progress monitoring, or longitudinal tracking.
- No baseline measurement is visible.
Score caps
- No fourth-loop score cap applied.
Review flags
- No source-backed follow-up, validation, baseline, tracking, or impact evidence.
- No tracking, validation, feedback, or impact measurement found in the visible source text.
- Original category was unknown; publication category is inferred.
Is this proof the event worked? +
No. This is a strict public-evidence reading of the agenda. Proof would require baseline, comparison, follow-up, attribution, and impact evidence beyond the listing.
What should a reader inspect first? +
Start with the source URL, then compare the eight pillar scores against the agenda rows. The biggest opportunities usually sit in follow-through, evidence maturity, and participant work.
Why publish weak records? +
Weak records are part of the map. They show where public agendas still describe sessions and speakers more often than outcomes, commitments, transfer, or proof.
How should I use the rows? +
Read the agenda rows as the visible design trace: formats, purposes, and evidence labels show what the public source made inspectable, not everything that happened in the room. This is a source-grounded interpretation of the public agenda record, not a copy of the source, and not an endorsement of the event.
Embed the verified badge +
This record is in the hand-verified gold set. Copy the snippet below to embed the verified badge on your own site.
<a href="https://unitedwetransform.com/events/evt_2024_roboticsconference_org_program_workshops_corl_2024_wcbm_workshop_github_io"><img src="https://unitedwetransform.com/badge/ges-verified.svg" alt="GES verified by United We Transform" height="40"></a>Where To Go Next
Compare this agenda against other Academic / Research / Science events scored on the same eight pillars.