Analysis of the Hazards Associated with the Appearance of Robots Moving in Pedestrian Zones

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to study the dangers associated with the appearance of robots moving in pedestrian areas. The object of the study is social relations in the sphere of interaction between pedestrians and robots. At the same time, the subject of research is the technologies underlying semi-autonomous and fully autonomous robots that affect the safety of people in contact with them. Within the framework of the research methodology, using the comparative legal method, an analysis of the main stages in the development and formation of technologies of modern robots with a high degree of autonomy was carried out.

The slogan «robots will take over our environment» is becoming a reality. Drones and ground-based delivery robots are used commercially, and semi-autonomous driving systems are standard accessories for traditional vehicles. However, while our eyes have been on the dangers and accidents of drone crashes and autonomous vehicle crashes, far less attention has been paid to the dangers of the inevitable emergence of robots sharing space with pedestrians and mingling with human traffic. These robots range from semi-autonomous or autonomous mobile platforms designed to provide multiple types of services such as assistant, patrol, guide, delivery, people transportation, etc.

We pay special attention to the dangers posed by robots moving in pedestrian traffic. In such situations, contact is not only inevitable, but may not be safe.

About the authors

Alexander Yu. Tarasov

Moscow regional branch of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia named after V.YA. Kikot

Author for correspondence.
Email: 7137355@gmail.com

Cand.Sci.(Law), Associate professor, Head of the Department of Organization of Activities of Subdivisions to Ensure Road Safety

Russian Federation, Staroteryaevo, Moscow reg.

Irina A. Tarasova

Moscow regional branch of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia named after V.YA. Kikot

Email: tarasovairina2@rambler.ru

Cand.Sci.(Law), Associate professor, Associate professor of the department of state, civil and law disciplines

Russian Federation, Staroteryaevo, Moscow reg.

References

  1. Jiang B. C, Gainer C. A. Causal analysis of robot accidents Occupation Acc 9 (1): doi.org /10.1016/0376-6349(87)90023-X.
  2. Stanchu S. K., Ebi D. V., Molnar L. J., Zannier N., Kostynyuk L. P. (2018) Pedestrians / cyclists and autonomous vehicles: How will they communicate? Transp Res, 2018: doi.org /10.1177/03611 98118777091.
  3. Pandey A. K, Gelin R. Pepper: the first car of its kind. A massive sociable humanoid robot. IEEE Robot Autom Mag, 2018.
  4. Ivanov S. H., Webster S., Berezina K. The introduction of robots and automation of services by travel and hotel companies. Rev Turismo Desenvol, 2017.
  5. Mansfeld N., Hamad M., Becker M.,Marin A.G., Haddadin S. (2018) Safety map: a unified representation of data on the effects of biomechanics and instantaneous dynamic properties of a robot. IEEE Robot Autom Lett, 2018.
  6. Fujikawa T, Kubota M, Yamada Y, Ikeda H (2013)Assessment of child collision injuries based on car accident data to assess the risk of mobile robots. IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2013.
  7. Kim H. Y., Park J. H, Yun S, Moon S, Gwak K.W. Preliminary results of experiments on chest compression in an unlimited collision of a mobile robot and a human. International Conference on Management, Automation and Systems, 2017.
  8. Dondrup C., Hanheide M. Qualitative limitations for human-oriented robot navigation using Velocity Costmaps. The 25th IEEE International Symposium on Interactive Communication between Robots and Humans. 2016: doi.org /10.1109/ ROMAN.2016.7745177.
  9. Okal B., Arras K. O. Studying the socially normative behavior of robots in navigation using Bayesian learning with reverse reinforcement. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2016: doi.org/10.
  10. Rainer K., Runke M., Steder B., Stakhniss K., Burgard V. Autonomous navigation of robots in densely populated pedestrian zones. Field Robot 33 (1), 2014: doi.org/10.
  11. Haddadin S., De Luca A., Albu-Schaefer A. Robot Collisions: an overview of detection, isolation and identification. IEEE Trans Rob 33(6), 2017: doi.org/10.1109 / TRO.2017.2723903.
  12. Lasota P. A., Fong T., Shah J.A. Review of methods of safe human-robot interaction. Found Trends Rob, 2014: doi.org/10.1561/2300000052.
  13. Rosenstrauch M. J., Kruger J. Safe Human–Robot Interaction - Introduction and Experiment using ISO/TS 15066. 3rd International Conference on Control, Automation and Robotics, 2017.
  14. Billard A. On the mechanical, cognitive and social aspects of human subordination and their robotic counterparts. Rob Auton Syst 88, 2017.
  15. "Report with recommendations of the Commission on Civil Law Standards in the field of robotics", published on 01/27/2017. URL: http:// www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies