Novel approaches for the safety of human-robot interaction

In recent years there has been a concerted effort to address many of the safety issues associated with physical human-robot interaction (pHRI). However, a number of challenges remain. For personal robots, and those intended to operate in unstructured environments, the problem of safety is compounded. We believe that the safety issue is a primary factor in wide scale adoption of personal robots, and until these issues are addressed, commercial enterprises will be unlikely to invest heavily in their development. In this thesis we argue that traditional system design techniques fail to capture the complexities associated with dynamic environments. This is based on a careful analysis of current design processes, which looks at how effectively they identify hazards that may arise in typical environments that a personal robot may be required to operate in. Based on this investigation, we show how the adoption of a hazard check list that highlights particular hazardous areas, can be used to improve current hazard analysis techniques. A novel safety-driven control system architecture is presented, which attempts to address many of the weaknesses identified with the present designs found in the literature. The new architecture design centres around safety, and the concept of a `safety policy' is introduced. These safety policies are shown to be an effective way of describing safety systems as a set of rules that dictate how the system should behave in potentially hazardous situations. A safety analysis methodology is introduced, which integrates both our hazard analysis technique and the implementation of the safety layer of our control system. This methodology builds on traditional functional hazard analysis, with the addition of processes aimed to improve the safety of personal robots. This is achieved with the use of a safety system, developed during the hazard analysis stage. This safety system, called the safety protection system, is initially used to verify that safety constraints, identified during hazard analysis, have been implemented appropriately. Subsequently it serves as a high-level safety enforcer, by governing the actions of the robot and preventing the control layer from performing unsafe operations. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the design, a series of experiments have been conducted using both simulation environments and physical hardware. These experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the safety-driven control system for performing tasks safely, while maintaining a high level of availability.

[1]  A. Bicchi,et al.  Physical human-robot interaction: Dependability, safety, and performance , 2008, 2008 10th IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control.

[2]  Jérémie Guiochet,et al.  Experience with Model-Based User-Centered Risk Assessment for Service Robots , 2010, 2010 IEEE 12th International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering.

[3]  Koji Ikuta,et al.  Safety-optimizing method of human-care robot design and control , 2002, Proceedings 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.02CH37292).

[4]  Mary Jackson Understanding Expert Systems: Using Crystal , 1992 .

[5]  S. A. Billings,et al.  RobotMODIC Modelling, Identification and Charaterisation of Mobile Robots , 2004 .

[6]  John A. McDermid,et al.  Experience with the application of HAZOP to computer-based systems , 1995, COMPASS '95 Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference on Computer Assurance Systems Integrity, Software Safety and Process Security'.

[7]  Thanh-Hung Nguyen,et al.  Toward a More Dependable Software Architecture for Autonomous Robots , 2008 .

[8]  D. N. P. Murthy,et al.  Complex System Maintenance Handbook , 2008 .

[9]  A. Mishkin Sojourner: An Insider's View of the Mars Pathfinder Mission , 2003 .

[10]  Mike Fraser,et al.  Building safer robots: Safety driven control , 2012, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[11]  Zachary Dodds,et al.  Evaluating the Roomba: A low-cost, ubiquitous platform for robotics research and education , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[12]  John Kenneth Salisbury,et al.  Towards a personal robotics development platform: Rationale and design of an intrinsically safe personal robot , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[13]  Adrian A. Hopgood,et al.  Intelligent Systems for Engineers and Scientists , 2021 .

[14]  Morgan Quigley,et al.  ROS: an open-source Robot Operating System , 2009, ICRA 2009.

[15]  Tim Kelly,et al.  The role of the human in an Autonomous System , 2009, ICONS 2009.

[16]  Søren Tranberg Hansen,et al.  Evolving composite robot behaviour - a modular architecture , 2005, Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Robot Motion and Control, 2005. RoMoCo '05..

[17]  Xiaodong Wu,et al.  Report of AAPM TG 135: quality assurance for robotic radiosurgery. , 2011, Medical physics.

[18]  John Spriggs,et al.  GSN - The Goal Structuring Notation , 2012 .

[19]  Andreas Lüdtke,et al.  Human Error Analysis Based on a Semantically Defined Cognitive Pilot Model , 2007, SAFECOMP.

[20]  Joanna J. Bryson,et al.  Hierarchy and Sequence vs. Full Parallelism in Action Selection , 2000 .

[21]  Andy Lovering,et al.  The Management of Complex, Safety-Related Information Systems , 2002, SSS.

[22]  Seonghee Jeong,et al.  Risk management simulator for low-powered human-collaborative industrial robots , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[23]  Colin Flanagan,et al.  SUBSUMPTION ARCHITECTURE FOR THE CONTROL OF ROBOTS , 2000 .

[24]  Tim Kelly,et al.  The Goal Structuring Notation – A Safety Argument Notation , 2004 .

[25]  Alexander Verl,et al.  Care-O-bot® 3 - creating a product vision for service robot applications by integrating design and technology , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[26]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Human-Robot Interaction: A Survey , 2008, Found. Trends Hum. Comput. Interact..

[27]  Mike Fraser,et al.  Safety control architecture for personal robots : behaviouralsuppression with deliberative control , 2010 .

[28]  Adrian A. Hopgood,et al.  The state of artificial intelligence , 2005, Adv. Comput..

[29]  Elena Troubitsyna,et al.  Formal Development of Reactive Fault Tolerant Systems , 2005, RISE.

[30]  Clifton A. Ericson,et al.  Hazard Analysis Techniques for System Safety , 2005 .

[31]  A. J. Offutt A practical system for mutation testing: help for the common programmer , 1994, Proceedings., International Test Conference.

[32]  Dana Kulic,et al.  Real-time safety for human - robot interaction , 2005, ICAR '05. Proceedings., 12th International Conference on Advanced Robotics, 2005..

[33]  Myron Hecht,et al.  An Integrated Fault Tolerant Robotic Controller System for High Reliability and Safety , 1994 .

[34]  Cornelius T. Leondes,et al.  Intelligent Knowledge-Based Systems , 2005 .

[35]  Hoyt Lougee,et al.  SOFTWARE CONSIDERATIONS IN AIRBORNE SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATION , 2001 .

[36]  David Kortenkamp,et al.  Using a Layered Control Architecture to Alleviate Planning with Incomplete Information , 1996 .

[37]  Trevor Taylor,et al.  Professional Microsoft Robotics Developer Studio , 2008 .

[38]  Koji Ikuta,et al.  Safety Evaluation Method of Design and Control for Human-Care Robots , 2003, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[39]  B. Peek,et al.  Managed Library for Nintendo's Wiimote , 2007 .

[40]  Mike Fraser,et al.  Biomimetics: Nature-Based Innovation , 2011 .

[41]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  An Agile Customer-Centered Method: Rapid Contextual Design , 2004, XP/Agile Universe.

[42]  Duncan A. Campbell,et al.  An intelligent control architecture for unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) , 2007 .

[43]  Alois Knoll,et al.  Design Principles for Safety in Human-Robot Interaction , 2010, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[44]  Robin R. Murphy Intelligent Sensor Fusion for the 1997 AAAI Mobile Robot Competition , 1997, AAAI/IAAI.

[45]  G. Giralt,et al.  Safe and dependable physical human-robot interaction in anthropic domains: State of the art and challenges , 2006, 2006 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[46]  Edgar A. Whitley,et al.  Building Knowledge Based Systems: Towards a Methodology , 1991 .