Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jul;3(2):74-99.
doi: 10.5898/JHRI.3.2.Beer.

Toward a framework for levels of robot autonomy in human-robot interaction

Jenay M Beer  1 , Arthur D Fisk  1 , Wendy A Rogers  1
Affiliations

Toward a framework for levels of robot autonomy in human-robot interaction

Jenay M Beer et al. J Hum Robot Interact. 2014 Jul.

Abstract

A critical construct related to human-robot interaction (HRI) is autonomy, which varies widely across robot platforms. Levels of robot autonomy (LORA), ranging from teleoperation to fully autonomous systems, influence the way in which humans and robots may interact with one another. Thus, there is a need to understand HRI by identifying variables that influence - and are influenced by - robot autonomy. Our overarching goal is to develop a framework for levels of robot autonomy in HRI. To reach this goal, the framework draws links between HRI and human-automation interaction, a field with a long history of studying and understanding human-related variables. The construct of autonomy is reviewed and redefined within the context of HRI. Additionally, the framework proposes a process for determining a robot's autonomy level, by categorizing autonomy along a 10-point taxonomy. The framework is intended to be treated as guidelines to determine autonomy, categorize the LORA along a qualitative taxonomy, and consider which HRI variables (e.g., acceptance, situation awareness, reliability) may be influenced by the LORA.

Keywords: Human-robot interaction; automation; autonomy; framework; levels of robot autonomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart showing application of the model of types and levels of automation (Parasurman, Sheridan, & Wickens, 2000).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Autonomy Levels For Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) model of autonomy, depicting level of HRI along autonomy continuum (Huang, Pavek, Albus, & Messina, 2005).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Organizing flow chart to determine robot autonomy and effects on HRI.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Levels of autonomy across the robot primitives sense, plan, and act. Two examples are given: assisted teleoperation (dotted line) and semi-autonomous navigation (solid line). Model modified from Parasuraman, Sheridan, and Wickens, 2000.
Figure 5
Figure 5
A framework of levels of robot autonomy for HRI. This framework can serve as a flow chart suggesting task and environmental influences on robot autonomy, guidelines for determining/measuring autonomy, a taxonomy for categorizing autonomy, and finally HRI variables that may be influenced by robot autonomy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alami R, Chatila R, Fleury S, Ghallab M, Ingrand F. An architecture for autonomy. International Journal of Robotics Research. 1998;17(4):315–337.
    1. Arkin RC. Behavior Based Robotics. Boston: MIT Press; 1998.
    1. Baker M, Yanco HA. Autonomy mode suggestions for improving human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 2004;3:2948–2953.
    1. Bekey GA. Autonomous Robots: From Biological Inspiration to Implementation and Control. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2005.
    1. Breazeal C. Emotion and Sociable Humanoid Robots. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction. 2003;59:119–115.

LinkOut - more resources