Paper detail

A Corroborative Approach to Verification and Validation of Human--Robot Teams

We present an approach for the verification and validation (V&V) of robot assistants in the context of human-robot interactions (HRI), to demonstrate their trustworthiness through corroborative evidence of their safety and functional correctness. Key challenges include the complex and unpredictable nature of the real world in which assistant and service robots operate, the limitations on available V&V techniques when used individually, and the consequent lack of confidence in the V&V results. Our approach, called corroborative V&V, addresses these challenges by combining several different V&V techniques; in this paper we use formal verification (model checking), simulation-based testing, and user validation in experiments with a real robot. We demonstrate our corroborative V&V approach through a handover task, the most critical part of a complex cooperative manufacturing scenario, for which we propose some safety and liveness requirements to verify and validate. We construct formal models, simulations and an experimental test rig for the HRI. To capture requirements we use temporal logic properties, assertion checkers and textual descriptions. This combination of approaches allows V&V of the HRI task at different levels of modelling detail and thoroughness of exploration, thus overcoming the individual limitations of each technique. Should the resulting V&V evidence present discrepancies, an iterative process between the different V&V techniques takes place until corroboration between the V&V techniques is gained from refining and improving the assets (i.e., system and requirement models) to represent the HRI task in a more truthful manner. Therefore, corroborative V&V affords a systematic approach to 'meta-V&V,' in which different V&V techniques can be used to corroborate and check one another, increasing the level of certainty in the results of V&V.

preprint2019arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.