Subscribe to EDN

Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century

August 24, 2009

The three laws of robotics that Isaac Asimov developed in 1940 are so ingrained in the literature and movies of the last 70 years that many people literally believe that robots cannot be built without incorporating these laws. Of course nothing could be further than the truth and the consequence is that people expect today’s robots to be far safer than they are. I had early experience with a warehouse-sized, pallet-handling robot crushing a person to death back in the 1970s. Relatively strong, blissfully unaware robots permeate our work scene and it’s up to us to watch out for them and the potential harm they can wreak. It’s also up to us as engineers to infuse awareness into these tools as quickly as we can to reduce the hazard.

Asimov’s three laws were supposedly embedded and diffused into the matrix of a robot’s positronic brain in the form of mathematical concepts so that the robot could not ignore the laws. The three laws are:

 

  1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
  2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
  3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

 

The first problem with implementing these three laws is that we’ve never developed positronic brains. All we have are microprocessors, but they’re probably up to the task if we get smart enough about using them.

The second problem, a much bigger one, is that the robot must be advanced enough to be able to identify a human being. No robot I know can do this. There are plenty of robots that can identify infrared hot spots that don’t belong and act accordingly. Other robots can pattern-match facial expressions and react according to a pre-programmed set of rules. But no real robots I’ve heard of can direct their sensors in some direction and conclude: there’s a human being there.

That’s pretty much the end of the line for Asimov’s three laws of robotics because they’re all based on the premise that the robot can distinguish a human from a dog or a cat or a hot steam iron. You need some good sensors and some pretty sophisticated programming to make the distinction.

If that was all there was, there wouldn’t be much point to this blog. However, I just read an article on msnbc.com about three new Laws of Robotics proposed by David Woods of Ohio State University and Robin Murphy at Texas A&M for the less-advanced robots we actually can make today; the ones without those magic positronic brains. These three new Laws of Robotics recognize that today’s robots are largely not autonomous and are usually under the care and supervision of human beings. If not under direct human control, the minimally autonomous robots we can build today are released “into the wild” in very specific situations where they probably won’t hurt anyone. (Note: I’m already aware of lethally armed battlefield robots, particularly UAVs, most of which are under direct human control when it matters. Those robots kill, on command.)

These three new laws of robotics for the early 21st century are:

 

  1. A human may not deploy a robot without the human-robot work system meeting the highest legal and professional standards of safety and ethics.
  2. A robot must respond to humans as appropriate for their roles.
  3. A robot must be endowed with sufficient situated autonomy to protect its own existence as long as such protection provides smooth transfer of control which does not conflict with the First and Second Laws.

 

These three new laws are still difficult to achieve, but they’re at least within reach given today’s technology. Those other laws, the durable one’s that Asimov conjured in 1940, we’ll just have to wait for the singularity for those.

 

Posted by Steve Leibson on August 24, 2009 | Comments (7)

September 2, 2009
In response to: Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century
Edward S. Lowry commented:

The first proposed law is violated consistently at present. All software including safety sensitive software is now written using technology for expressing software simply (and hence safely) which is less advanced than what was published by IBM 35 years ago and implemented by DEC 25 years ago. See "Software Simplicity, and hence Safety -- Thwarted for Decades" at users.rcn.com/eslowry .


August 29, 2009
In response to: Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century
Pierre commented:

The military poses a real challenge to robo-ethics....they are already heavily invested in the idea of battlefield robotics and cyberwarfare. Asimov's laws seem to rule out having the robots do the killing (unless warfare is by treaty limited to robot vs. robot?). The US is in a short, gleeful period where we can kill enemies with Predator UAVs, but that attitude will change remarkably when our enemies start dishing it out on us. Then, the people will see how foolish it is to develop powerful technologies in a military framework, instead of a peace-framework. In robo-warfare and cyber-warfare, nobody wins, everybody loses. The only way to change the mindset is to ramp up govt. spending on peaceful uses of robotics, so that the militarists will be surrounded with a robo-ethics movement that is well-funded.


August 28, 2009
In response to: Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century
Steve Leibson commented:

From your perspective Josef, these laws may well be cheating because they can't be built into the robot itself. However, until robots are far more aware of their surroundings, people MUST do this sort of thinking just as they must with automobiles.


August 28, 2009
In response to: Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century
Josef commented:

These new laws are cheating: They are not laws "for robots", they are laws "for people using robots". They follow the old rule: Guns don't kill people - people kill people. By the way, wherever I read "MUST", I think: What if not? I would certainly not design a robot to violate the 2nd new law - but what if it has a bug?


August 24, 2009
In response to: Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century
Chandra sheker commented:

Its interesting top know about these three laws - but implement we need to put more efforts than it actual task it is supposed to be done - in any case most of the robots are not used in human environment - what is point of getting into these laws . Safety is important factor that must be considered.


August 24, 2009
In response to: Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century
BrainiacV commented:

Go back and read Asimov's stories. He spent most of them demonstrating that the Three Laws did not really work.


August 24, 2009
In response to: Three new Laws of Robotics for the early 21st Century
cidbarca commented:

Now why go there Steven? We were having such fun last week! This is exactly why I would never live in Orange County. At least not prior to the demise of the aircraft industry, the bond market fiasco, and Great Depression II. Optimistic Engineer's are fine if you're in a static system and need some good mechanical, electrical, biological, chemical, or quantum regulations. But the notion of "social engineering" is as futile, deceptive and dangerous as any of those eternal "religious tolerance" campaigns. I bet you EE's think "District 9" was all about bad socially engineering, and "Frankenstein" was all about science run amok too. :) All laws for the 21st Century should be written in Humboldt County - or possibly Mendocino - but definitely not Orange County. And obviously no county in Ohio or Texas can be trusted. LoL! Asimov certainly isn't innocent of the crime, but Roddenberry clearly dumped this "EE optimism" in the planetary water supply. cb

POST A COMMENT
Display Name
captcha

Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above. Note the letters are case sensitive:

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
About EDN   |   Site Map   |   Contact Us   |   Subscription   |   RSS
© 2011 UBM Electronics. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Please visit these other UBM Canon sites

UBM Canon | Design News | Test & Measurement World | Packaging Digest | EDN | Qmed | Pharmalive | Appliance Magazine | Plastics Today | Powder Bulk Solids | Canon Trade Shows