Autonomous Robots 2

Autonomous Law: Robots in the Work Place

Dr Adrian McCullagh Ph.D., LL.B. (Hons), B. App. Sc. (Computing)

Principal

ODMOB Lawyers

[email protected]

2 Agenda Defining what a Robot is

Robots in the Workplace

Autonomous vehicles

Automatic reverse parking;

Large industrial vehicles in the mining sector

Australian Standards covering this this sector

South Australian Driverless Vehicle trial

What can go wrong?

What policy issues should be investigated

Conclusion

28 October 2015Dr Adrian McCullagh - [email protected]

3What is a Robot?

Defining what a robot is; is not an easy task.

Karel Čapek wrote a play called Rossum’s Universal Robots, coining a new meaning for the word “Robot”. According to Čapek robots were mass produced workers assembled from artificially synthesized organic material.

As Justice Stewart of the US Supreme Court stated in dealing with Pornography:

I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description, and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that. Jacobellis v. Ohio (No. 11), 378 U.S. 184

A similar position arises in trying to define what a robot is.

That is, it is hard to define as there are many intricate aspects but I know a robot when I see a robot.

I intend to go where the learned Supreme Court Justice did not venture. For this discussion I will define a robot as:

Any non biological structure that can autonomously adjust its functionality so as to accommodate any changes to its external environment.

I am sure that this definition can be criticised and I now intend to briefly do so.

Dr Adrian McCullagh - [email protected] 28 October 2015

4 What is a Robot? One major criticism, is that its scope is practically unlimited, which

can cause uncertainty.

What are the characteristics on MY ROBOT:

1. Non-Biological Structure

2. Autonomously adjust its functionality

3. Accommodate changes to its external environment.

Non-Biological should not cause to much issue. To be a robot it should be something that does not involve cell structure as generally understood. This does not mean that the robot cannot involve biological processes. Some nanobots may attach themselves to certain cells in order to function.

Autonomously adjust its functionality:

Does there need to be some form of Artificial Intelligence involved.


5 What is a Robot? Accommodate changes in its external environment.

This requires some form of sensor technology to be involved.

The external stimuli will be processed so that the machine can automatically adjust its functionality.

For example, in many industrial robots there are sensors built in to the machine that will cause the machine to stop working in case of a potential accident. This is particularly so within the car industry with their high powered automated welding machines. Anyone walking within a certain distance or crossing the mandatory barrier will cause the machine to stop, and set off an alarm.

Should this type of machine be classified as a Robot or does the machine need to pass the Turing test?


6What is a Robot?

Turing Test (imitation game) 1950.

Turing proposed a parlour game, such that a man and a woman are in two separate rooms and communicate with an interrogator only by means of a teletype; A non-face-to-face communication. The interrogator must correctly identify the man and the woman and, in order to do so, he can ask any question capable of being communicated. The man tries to convince the interrogator that he is the woman, while the woman tries to communicate her real identity. The imitation game is formed. At some point during the game the man is replaced by a machine. If the interrogator remains incapable of distinguishing the machine from the woman, the machine will be said to have passed the Test and thus the possesses some intelligence.

It is common place for the automated high powered welding machines as used in the car manufacturing industry to be classified as a robot and my definition above would cover their inclusion.


7What is a Robot?

BUT so could a heart pace-maker or a cochlear bionic ear or a driverless vehicle.

Of course, the industrial welding machine would not pass the Turing test but the cochlear bionic ear certainly fools the brain into thinking that there are sounds which it can decipher even though the electro-impulses are being transmitted to the brain via the electronic implant.

Consequently, is the Turing test relevant in order to classify a machine as a robot?


8 Robots in the Work Place In Australia there is only one piece of legislative enactment that

deals with robots.

Regulation 222 (Industrial Robots) of the Work Health and Safety Regulations 2011 deal with Industrial Robots as follows:.

(1) This section applies to a person with management or control of an industrial robot or other remotely or automatically energised plant at a workplace.

(2) The person must not allow or direct a worker to work in the immediate vicinity of the plant if it could start without warning and cause a hazard, unless suitable control measures are in place to control the risks to health and safety.

Maximum penalty—60 penalty units.


9 Robots in the Work Place An Industrial Robot is defined as follows:

industrial robot means plant that is a multifunctional manipulator and its controllers, capable of handling materials, parts or tools, or specialised devices, through variable programmed motions for the performance of a variety of tasks.

All that is required is multifunction equipment that is programmed to perform a variety of tasks. As will be discussed it may be necessary for the machine to have presence sensing capability. Thus autonomously adjusting its functionality through changes in its environment.


10 Robots in the Workplace Subsection 3 provides:

If the remote or automatic energising of the plant could lead to risks to health and safety, the person must ensure that access to the area in the immediate vicinity of the plant is controlled at all times—

(a) by isolating the area; or

(b) by—

(i) providing interlocked guards; or

(ii) if a risk remains, providing presence-sensing devices; or

(iii) if a risk then remains, providing permit to work systems.

Maximum penalty—60 penalty units.


11 Robots in the Workplace There are nine separate jurisdictions that have

different rates for a penalty unit. Under Federal law the rate is currently set at $180 whereas in the State of Queensland it is set at $117.50.

If someone is injured there are other sections that will increase cumulatively increase the civil penalty unit. Further, Senior Management can be held personally accountable under Australian Law.

The next issue is the creation of trust in these autonomous objects.


12 Autonomous vehicles Creating a trusted environment is going to be a major aspect

of autonomous objects where there may be human to robot interaction.

In Australia the mining sector has advanced the role of autonomous vehicles substantially, but only on private property.

The second largest global mining company Rio Tinto has deployed some 65 autonomous driverless trucks/vehicles across one of its large mining operations in the Pilbara in northern Western Australia.

None of these vehicles can leave the mine site without human intervention.Dr Adrian McCullagh - [email protected] 28 October 2015

13 Autonomous vehicles All vehicles are monitored through a Network Operations

Centre in Perth which is more than 1500 kilometres (1000 miles) away.

Presently, the only human interaction is via remote override controls by operators housed in the NOC.

If a vehicle breaks down at the mine site then a team of technicians will attend the mine site but under strict rules.

Further, RIO Tinto has also deployed driverless trains for shipment to ports for export of the raw material. This also has occurred in the remote Pilbara region in Western Australia.


14 Autonomous vehicles – Driverless trains RIO Tinto has announced that :

One of its locomotive will be fitted out with auto-haul technology which will cart iron ore to the port along the Tom Price railway.

The train will initially be manned to ensure the new equipment runs smoothly.

Rio Tinto hopes that most of its trains will not require drivers.

Again this vehicle is travelling on a private railway line which operates on a private land corridor.


15 Autonomous vehicles – Driverless trains

According to press reports Rio Tinto has expended more that $550 million on autonomous trains.

Recently, Andrew Harding a senior executive of Rio Tinto explained that:

“Our automated trucks operate a 50-metre safety bubble and would have stopped well short of any collision,”

Mr Harding was giving a presentation where he showed what happens when one of their mining trucks collides with a normal 4 wheel drive. It was crushed. Luckily the driver escaped without injury.

With driverless vehicles according to Mr Harding such accidents will just not occur.

See RIO TINTO MINING:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0RCSX95QmE

See ABB robotics for the mining sector:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POqw0rIJe78








16 Driverless Vehicles The US National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA) has defined the various stages of autonomous vehicles as follows: Level 0: The human driver is in complete control of

all functions of the car. Level 1: One function is automated, cruse control.. Level 2: More than one function is automated at

the same time (e.g., steering and acceleration), but the driver must remain constantly attentive. Mercedes Lane control technology.


17 Driverless Vehicles Level 3: The driving functions are sufficiently

automated that the driver can safely engage in other activities. (reverse parking is a clear example)

Level 4: The car can drive itself without a human driver or human intervention.

This definition has been accepted by the South Australian Government.

It is level 4 that is at present the most exciting globally not only in the USA but also in Australia.


18 Driverless Vehicles Presently the GOOGLE car would be classified as

being at level 3. Basically level 3 allows for human intervention to override the functionality of the AV.

Autonomous vehicles or better known as Driverless vehicles are coming to a road nearby, probably a complete AV will be available in 20 to 30 years time.

Human failings are one of the greatest concerns, not from the AV but from other drivers on the public road.


19 South Australian Driverless Vehicle trial On September 23 2015, the South Australian Government

introduced to Parliament the Motor Vehicles (Trials of Automotive Technologies) Amendment Bill 2015.

The current Bill is fairly scant on details. The details are expected to be included in a set of regulations which have not yet been published. The relevant Minister must also publish on the Transport Departments website details of the authorisation notice which will contain at a minimum:

1. The location of the trial,

2. The period of the trail (start date and end date);


20 South Australian Driverless Vehicle trial1. Scope of the trial such as type of vehicle utilised, weather

conditions, type of traffic conditions, simulation of city traffic or rural traffic;

2. Name of person authorised to undertake the traffic. The relevant vehicle will be exempt from the compulsory

third party vehicle insurance but must have appropriate public liability insurance. The amount of such insurance has not yet been determined.


21 South Australian Driverless Vehicle Trial The Transport Minister can revoke or suspend the

authorisation notice at any time.

Of importance is that it is a criminal offence to interfere with or hinder the trial.

The rationale for this is that certain groups could want to cause some disruption of the trial in order to delay the introduction of this type of technology. Such groups could include any professional drivers such as truck drivers (as opposed to trucking companies) and taxi drivers (as opposed to taxi companies).

The maximum penalty for interfering with a trial is $10,000.


22 South Australian Driverless Vehicle Trial No prosecution can occur without the consent of the

Minister for Transport. The Trial provider has to prepare a report on the trial. It

is expected that 2 reports will be prepared: A public report; and A private confidential report.

The public report must be presented to Parliament and made public on the Transport Departments Web site.


23 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

13 October discussion draft Bill was released by 114th Congress concerning inter alia updates to vehicles and vehicle technology and to provide greater transparency, accountability, and safety authority to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,.

The Bill can be located at:

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF17/20151021/104070/BILLS-114pih-DiscussionDraftonVehicleandRoadwaySafety.pdf






24 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration TITLE III—PRIVACY, HACKING PROHIBITION, AND CYBER

SECURITY SEC. 302. MOTOR VEHICLE DATA HACKING.

Hacking a motor vehicle is a criminal offence. BUT what if it is your own vehicle. For example a University buys a vehicles and hacks it should this be a criminal offence.

Section 30122 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection

(d)It shall be unlawful for any person to access, without authorization, an electronic control unit or critical system of a motor vehicle, or other system containing driving data for such motor vehicle, either wirelessly or through a wired connection.

CRITICAL SYSTEM.—The term ‘critical system’ means software, firmware, or hardware located within or on a motor vehicle that, if accessed without authorization, can affect the movement of the vehicle.

Max Penalty of $100,000 per vehicle affected.

. Dr Adrian McCullagh - [email protected] 28 October 2015

25 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Pursuant to §30701. a Automotive Cybersecurity Advisory

Council must be established within 12 months from date of enactment of chapter:

The council will comprise: A defence member;

NHSTA member;

NIST member;

And members from Manufacturers who process more than 20,000 vehicles per year.

Further the committee members must comprise more than 50 % from manufacturers.


26 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Section 30122 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by

adding at the end the following new subsection

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to access, without authorization, an electronic control unit or critical system of a motor vehicle, or other system containing driving data for such motor vehicle, either wirelessly or through a wired connection.

Further definitions for the section:

CRITICAL SYSTEM.—The term ‘critical system’ means software, firmware, or hardware located within or on a motor vehicle that, if accessed without authorization, can affect the movement of the vehicle.

Max Penalty of $100,000 per vehicle affected.

Pursuant to §30701. a Automotive Cybersecurity Advisory Council must be established within 12 months from date of enactment of chapter.


27 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ‘advanced automotive technology’ means any vehicle

information system, unit, device, or technology that meets any applicable performance metric and demonstrates crash avoidance or congestion mitigation benefits such as any of the following technologies:

(A) Forward collision warning.

(B) Adaptive brake assist.

(C) Autonomous emergency braking.

(D) Adaptive cruise control.

(E) Lane departure warnings.

(F) Lane keeping assistance.

(G) Driver attention monitor.

(H) Left turn assist.

(I) Intersection movement assist.


28 What Can Go Right? The RAND CORPORTATION in late 2014 published an

extensive report dealing with Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) and in particular driverless vehicles on public roads.

The report can be found here:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR443-1.html




29 What Can Go Right? Further a CMU student report which though not a

definitive report from CMU does have some very interesting observations concerning the policy issues involving AVs.

This report is located at:

www.cmu.edu/epp/people/faculty/course-reports/Autonomous Car Final Report.pdf


http://www.cmu.edu/epp/people/faculty/course-reports/Autonomous%20Car%20Final%20Report.pdf



30 What Can Go Right?The Rand report identified that

“In general, robotic systems, including AVs, use a “sense-plan-act” design. In order to sense the environment, AVs use a combination of sensors, including LIDAR (light detection and ranging), radar, cameras, ultrasonic, and infrared. A suite of sensors in combination can complement one another and make up for any weaknesses in any one kind of sensor.”

The report went to state:

“While robotic systems are very good at collecting data about the environment, making sense of that data remains probably the hardest part of developing an ultra-reliable AV.”Dr Adrian McCullagh - [email protected] 28 October 2015

31 What can go right? If the technology does become ultra reliable then it is

expected that there will be a reduction in accidents which could remove the requirement of the current compulsory motor vehicle Insurance policies.

Instead it is expected that manufacturer’s product liability insurance will become the prominent insurance policy for AVs.

28 October

2015Dr Adrian McCullagh - [email protected]

32 What can go wrong Caveat: IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO COVER THIS

FIELD IN FULL It is the last part that is important – Building an ULTRA-

RELIABLE AV”. This will greatly depend on

processing speed of chips; new algorithms to process real-time data in rapid

timeframes New algorithms dealing with pattern recognition

and environmental changes like sunny days compared to blizzard days.


33 What can go wrong It is likely that the AV will rely upon multiple

technologies such as GPS and Inertial Navigation Systems (INS).

Unfortunately these systems can be somewhat inaccurate by up to 1 meter.

Think of one meter when traveling at 60 MPH.


34 What can go wrong Further what happens if there is a conflict between the

technologies. How will the system resolve such conflicts. Hacking into one or more of the safety critical systems. For

example: Security researcher Jonathan Petit claims to be able to hack the multi-thousand-dollar laser ranging – LIDAR – systems that self-driving cars rely on.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/researcher-hacks-selfdriving-car-sensors

ALSO See:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5E28fp4oc0&feature=youtu.be







35 What can go wrong

Software upgrades could be an issue. The AV is a member of the Internet of Things environment and as such security must be a high priority. Is this a prime example where over engineering should be mandatory.

Maybe this is where whitelists should be deployed instead of blacklist deployment. Blacklists are and will always be in catch-up mode



Dr Adrian McCullagh - [email protected]

Changed environmental conditions creates an overly cautious AV that creates an unsafe condition for other drivers.

Decision in no win scenarios. Remember ASIMOV’s three laws of robotics:

A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

28 October 2015


37 What can go wrong A scenario where the situation causes a decision in a

no win situation whereby any reaction to the situation will cause injury to a human. Conflict resolution as to whether: Hit person A; or Hit person B; or Injure the passenger.

28 October 2015



Road Rage: how will other drivers deal with strict compliance with the AVs’ interpretation of the road rules. Does the rage perpetrator attack the car or the passenger?

How does an AV deal with emergency service vehicles. It will need frequency sensors to identify emergency vehicles that have by law right of way.

What happens if there is an electrical fault with the vehicle like a burnt out fuse. Does there need to be inbuilt redundancy in the fuse structure.

28 October 2015

39 What policy issues should be investigated Key policy issues are:

How, if at all, should the use of AVs be regulated, and at what level?

What kinds of vehicles should be allowed on the road, and who is allowed to operate/travel in them?

For example:

Blind people,

Children (should there be an age restriction).

Should there be a restriction on who can start an AV?

For example some bio-metric activation mechanism. (voice control -siri)

How should the safety of AVs be tested, and by whom? To what safety standards should AVs be held?

Since Safety Critical Software is involved how should that be certified?


40 What policy issues should be investigated Key Issues Continued:

How might different liability regimes shape the timely and safe adoption of AVs, and what are the tradeoffs? Under what conditions would limitations on tort liability be appropriate?

What are the implications of a patchwork of state-by-state laws and regulations, and what are the tradeoffs in harmonizing these policies? Australia only has 9 separate jurisdictions, this is miniscule to that of

the USA or Europe.

To what extent should policymakers encourage the adoption of AVs; e.g., through smart road infrastructure, dedicated highway lanes, manufacturer or consumer incentives?

With Software upgrades what security structure should be imposed?


41 What policy issues should be investigated Key Issues Continued:

For example: digitally signed updates; Tamper resistant and tamper evident hardware to

store the safety critical software (eg: FIPS 140 – 2 Level 3 certification)?

Should White-listed software only be capable of operating the vehicle?


42 What policy issues should be investigated Should uploads of any software be IP address to IP

address restricted? Should the operator of the upload also have to

authenticate him/her self to the machine through some smart device (2 factor authentication).


43 What policy issues should be investigated What awareness programs for the general public

needs to be undertaken. There will obviously be a slow uptake/gradual uptake of AVs so should all AVs on public roads clearly state that they are an AV. The rationale for this is that AVs will meticulously follow road rules as opposed to humans who have been known to take liberties with such rules.


44 Conclusion In Australia there is only one law that deals with Robots and

it only deals with so called industrial robots. (Regulation 222 of the Work Health and Safety Regulations 2012)

The mining industry is probably the most advanced sector in the deployment of robots through the deployment of driverless transport vehicles such as heavy duty trucks or trains.

The South Australian Government on 23 September 2015 has introduced into the Parliament a Bill which if passed will allow the first driverless vehicles to be operated on public roads even though in a controlled setting.


45 Conclusion There are a number of unresolved issues, such as:

Liability frameworks, Security frameworks remember that this technology forms part of a

larger environment encompassing IoT; Over ride mechanisms for human to machine interactions; Cultural acceptance by non-driverless vehicles operators. Social Acceptance by the general public per se. As MIT Professor David Mindell in his book “Our Robots, Ourselves”

notes that the advancement of autonomous vehicles (on public roads) will be incremental at best and level 4 under the NHTSA scale is unlikely to ever be achieved. (published 13 October 2015)

Only Time will Tell


Date post:	04-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	admac57
View:	23 times
Download:	2 times

Autonomous Robots 2

Documents