Safety control architecture for personal robots : behaviouralsuppression with deliberative control

This paper presents a novel robot control architecture for use with personal robots, and argues its potential for improving the safety of these types of system, when compared to existing approaches. The proposed architecture design separates the control system into two distinct areas, one area responsible for safe operation and the other for coordinating tasks. The architecture design is formed in a hierarchical structure, composed of low-level deliberative control modules and high-level behavioural safety modules. It is argued that as a result of removing safety considerations from the design of task routines, increasingly complex tasks can be completed safely, which are both more flexible to environmental changes and easier to coordinate.

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

[2]  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.

[3]  Dana Kulic,et al.  Strategies for safety in human robot interaction , 2003 .

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

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

[6]  O. Ogorodnikova.  Methodology of safety for a human robot interaction designing stage , 2008, 2008 Conference on Human System Interactions.

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

[8]  D. M. Hutton,et al.  Cambrian Intelligence: The Early History of the New AI , 2000 .

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

[10]  Antonio Bicchi,et al.  An atlas of physical human-robot interaction , 2008 .

[11]  Raja Chatila,et al.  On Fault Tolerance and Robustness in Autonomous Systems , 2004 .

[12]  Mats G. Nordahl,et al.  An evolutionary architecture for a humanoid robot , 1999 .

[13]  David Powell,et al.  Experiments with Diversified Models for Fault-Tolerant Planning , 2007 .

[14]  Karsten Berns,et al.  Development of complex robotic systems using the behavior-based control architecture iB2C , 2010, Robotics Auton. Syst..

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

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

[17]  Tucker R. Balch,et al.  AuRA: principles and practice in review , 1997, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[18]  Joachim Hertzberg,et al.  Concurrency in the DD&P Robot Control Architecture , 2002 .

[19]  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.

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

[21]  Robin R. Murphy,et al.  Sfx: An Architecture For Action-oriented Sensor Fusion , 1992, Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

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