Âé¶¹ÊÓÆµ

Code of Conduct

We maintain an inclusive, curious, and respectful research community where every voice is valued regardless of rank, background, or identity. We approach research with openness, rigour, and ethical care. We collaborate actively: offering and receiving constructive feedback graciously, sharing knowledge, code, and hardware within the lab, and taking initiative on projects while making sure everyone has fair opportunities to contribute.

Professionalism & Inclusivity

Professionalism and mutual respect are the foundation of our lab. All members are expected to treat one another with respect, use welcoming language (including people's correct pronouns), and respect personal space, privacy, and boundaries, for example by asking permission before photographing or recording others or their workstations. Communication by email, Slack, and in person should be professional. We respect non-working hours: replies during evenings or weekends are never expected unless explicitly arranged in advance. Harassment, discrimination, exploitation, bullying, and misuse of power dynamics will not be tolerated under any circumstances.

Lab Safety, Hardware & Software Practices

Shared resources, including hardware tools, 3D printers, robots, sensors, and GPU compute infrastructure, must be handled with care, kept clean, and operated according to Âé¶¹ÊÓÆµ safety procedures. Report any hardware damage immediately so it can be made safe and repaired quickly; there is never a penalty for accidental damage that is reported promptly. Software should follow good engineering practice, including version control, documentation, and readable code, so future lab members can build on past work.

Research Integrity & Authorship

All research must follow Âé¶¹ÊÓÆµ's research integrity policies. Unpublished results, data, and code stay within the lab unless the PI and project collaborators agree otherwise.

Authorship expectations are discussed openly at the start of each project and revisited as the work evolves. We follow IEEE's authorship criteria: each author must (1) make a significant intellectual contribution to the theoretical development, system or experimental design, prototype development, and/or analysis and interpretation of data; (2) contribute to drafting or critically revising the manuscript; and (3) approve the final version. Graduate students who lead a core research thrust are first authors on manuscripts arising from that work. Mentoring undergraduate researchers is valued and recognized, and mentors are co-authors when they also meet the criteria above. Contributors who don't meet the criteria are acknowledged in the paper. All public software repositories and datasets credit every contributor in their release documentation and README files.

Conflict Resolution & Reporting

If you experience or witness behaviour that violates this Code of Conduct, or face personal or interpersonal challenges, several pathways are available.

Within the lab: If it feels safe and comfortable, you are encouraged to address the issue directly with the person involved. You can also bring concerns to the PI (Sven Lilge) in a 1-on-1, by email, or on Slack. I will handle concerns discreetly and act promptly. Please note that in some situations, such as harassment or safety risks, Âé¶¹ÊÓÆµ policy may require me to take further steps.

Outside the lab: For concerns involving the PI, or whenever you'd prefer independent or formal support, Âé¶¹ÊÓÆµ offers:

Our Commitment

By joining the ARCS Lab, members agree to uphold this Code of Conduct. It is a living document that we review together regularly so it continues to reflect the needs of our team.