Is there a convention on how to write pseudocode in scientific papers? I've found questions answering where or when to write pseudocode in scientific papers, but I haven't found any addressing any sort of convention for pseudocode, such as syntax, what type of symbols or notation to use and what they mean precisely, or any sort of 'formal' definition of pseudocode. I suppose that's the nature of pseudocode, it should be understandable and general no matter how you write it, but I wish there was some sort of guidance for how to structure and convey meanings across in a formal manner. Does this exist? For now I am purely imitating the CLRS pseudocode style.
As you are already stating: There is no norm / convention for pseudocode. 

Personally, I prefer a python-like notation, but this is because I like python ;-). CLRS is fine for many purposes. 

If your software is written in a specific language, it might be beneficial to use a code convention which allows you to express the specifics of your programming language - this reduces the risk of introducing errors. 

Even more important then the code convention is, that you should ensure your pseudocode allows someone else to re-implement your code without room for interpretations. Sometimes, "real" code can be more appropriate (but yes, it can be lengthy).