Skip to content

ESDMD #1005: Safe Human-Robot Interaction and Teaming

Safe, efficient ways for crew and robots to share work areas, for crew to control robots from inside habitats, and for ground operators to supervise robots across high-latency links (bin 3, rating 28 of 57). The state of the art cited is commercial: "human-scale robots working alongside humans to move cargo in warehouses" (Tech gaps spreadsheet, ESDMD #1005).

Quotations below are from row ESDMD #1005 of the tech gaps spreadsheet unless marked otherwise. ADD Rev C's Appendix D prints the same table for this gap, and it matches the row field for field (ADD Rev C, p. 251).

Description

"Integrated human and robotic systems are desired to enable maximum science and exploration during future missions. Technology advancements are needed in robust, reliable, safe, and efficient methods of human-robot interaction, communication, and task coordination. Human-robot interaction could describe crew operating in the same area as one or many autonomous/semi-autonomous robotic systems, ground-based operators supervising semi-autonomous robots in space, crew inside a surface habitat controlling remote robots external to the habitat, or other permutations. Human-robot teaming could describe joint crew-robot teams operating in parallel or collaboratively."

Impacts and benefits: "Without gap closure, robotic operations would be limited for exploration and science operations. Planned and future missions may not be viable or may have reduced value due to actual or perceived lack of safety in human-robot interactions."

Current state of the art

"Increasing commercial use of human-scale robots working alongside humans to move cargo in warehouses."

Performance target

  • Moon/Mars: "Safe human-robot interactions at level of efficiency that supports human exploration; safe command and control across high-latency and bandwidth-limited networks; built-in or automated safing sequences."
  • Mars: "In addition, increased autonomy, reliability, and communication delays compared to the lunar performance target."

Child gaps

  • 1005-01: Situational awareness and safety controls for human-robot interaction
  • 1005-02: Task planning and execution software for autonomous systems
  • 1005-03: In-situ command and control of multiple robotic assets

Traceability

  • Use cases and functions: UC-A-101 L -- FN-A-102 L; UC-A-104 L -- FN-A-101 L; UC-A-301 L -- FN-A-302 L; UC-A-301 M -- FN-A-301 M
  • Definition tasks: Mars: Priorities for Crew vs. Robotic Tasks Strategy
  • Cross-reference: FN-A-302 L, "Provide safeguards for automated asset(s) operating near crew", is also one of the Users Guide's Phase 1 functional gaps (Users Guide, p. 8; see Phase 1 functional gaps). This link joins the two sources; neither makes it. The same use case–function pair (UC-A-301 L -- FN-A-302 L) also appears under #1002 and #1004.

Segments and sub-architectures

Priority

Priority bin 3, overall prioritization rating 28 of 57. The rating is "the gap's location in the prioritized list of gaps", so 1 is the highest priority, and bins group gaps of similar priority, bin 1 highest. Criticality, urgency, breadth and depth set the order; cost is not considered (ADD Rev C, pp. 78, 199; method on the gaps index).

Moon Base relevance

Not established by the sources so far. The Users Guide does not name #1005 among its near-term Moon Base challenges (Technology and knowledge challenges). The function cross-reference under Traceability is a link between sources, not a mapping either source makes.

Sources

Tech gaps spreadsheet, ESDMD #1005 · ADD Rev C, pp. 78, 199, 251 · Users Guide, p. 8