laws of robotics

{{main|Three Laws of Robotics}}

The best known set of laws are Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics". These were introduced in his 1942 short story "Runaround", although they were foreshadowed in a few earlier stories. 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 the orders {{sic|given it|expected=given to it|hide=y}} 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 Laws.{{cite book|last=Asimov|first=Isaac|title=I, Robot|date=1950}}

In "The Evitable Conflict" the machines generalize the First Law to mean:

1. No machine may harm humanity; or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.

This was refined in the end of Foundation and Earth. A zeroth law was introduced, with the original three suitably rewritten as subordinate to it:

{{ordered list|start=0|A robot may not injure humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.}}

Adaptations and extensions exist based upon this framework. {{As of|2024}} they remain a "fictional device".{{cite news|last=Stewart|first=Jon|title=Ready for the robot revolution?|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15146053|access-date=2011-10-03|newspaper=BBC News|date=2011-10-03}}

Authors other than Asimov have often created extra laws.

The 1974 Lyuben Dilov novel, Icarus's Way (a.k.a., The Trip of Icarus) introduced a Fourth Law of robotics: "A robot must establish its identity as a robot in all cases."

Dilov gives reasons for the fourth safeguard in this way: "The last Law has put an end to the expensive aberrations of designers to give psychorobots as humanlike a form as possible. And to the resulting misunderstandings...".{{cite book

| last = Dilov

| first = Lyuben (aka Lyubin, Luben or Liuben)

| author-link = Lyuben Dilov

| title = Пътят на Икар

| year = 2002

| publisher = Захари Стоянов

| isbn = 978-954-739-338-7}} More formally, in 2024 Dariusz Jemielniak in an article in IEEE Spectrum proposed a Fourth Law of Robotics: "A robot or AI must not deceive a human by impersonating a human being."{{Cite web |title=We Need a Fourth Law of Robotics for AI - IEEE Spectrum |url=https://spectrum.ieee.org/isaac-asimov-robotics |access-date=2025-02-03 |website=spectrum.ieee.org |language=en}}{{Cite web |date=2025-01-24 |title=A Fourth Law of Robotics {{!}} Berkman Klein Center |url=https://cyber.harvard.edu/story/2025-01/fourth-law-robotics |access-date=2025-02-03 |website=cyber.harvard.edu |language=en}}{{Cite web |date=2025-01-15 |title=Ki kell egészíteni Asimov robotikai törvényeit az AI miatt |url=https://www.blikk.hu/ferfiaknak/tech/robotika-torvenyei/nxbvh73 |access-date=2025-02-03 |website=Blikk |language=hu}}{{Cite web |last=Tecnológica |first=Site Inovação |date=2025-01-21 |title=Leis da Robótica de Asimov precisam de atualização para IA |url=https://www.inovacaotecnologica.com.br/noticias/noticia.php?artigo=leis-robotica-asimov-precisam-atualizacao-ia&id=010180250121 |access-date=2025-02-03 |website=Site Inovação Tecnológica |language=pt}}{{Cite news |last=Jaśkowiak |first=Piotr |date=2025-02-01 |title=Asimovowi zabrakło wyobraźni. Potrzebujemy Czwartego Prawa Robotyki |url=https://ssl.audycje.tokfm.pl/podcast/170407,Asimovowi-zabraklo-wyobrazni-Potrzebujemy-Czwartego-Prawa-Robotyki-a-na-antenie-tworzymy-Piate |work=Radio TokFM}}

A fifth law was introduced by Nikola Kesarovski in his short story "The Fifth Law of Robotics". This fifth law says: "A robot must know it is a robot."

The plot revolves around a murder where the forensic investigation discovers that the victim was killed by a hug from a humaniform robot that did not establish for itself that it was a robot.{{cite book

| last = Кесаровски

| first = Никола

| author-link = Nikola Kesarovski

| title = Петият закон

| year = 1983

| publisher = Отечество

}} The story was reviewed by Valentin D. Ivanov in SFF review webzine The Portal.[http://sffportal.net/2011/06/lawful-little-country-the-bulgarian-laws-of-robotics/#more-2376 Lawful Little Country: The Bulgarian Laws of Robotics | The Portal]

For the 1986 tribute anthology, Foundation's Friends, Harry Harrison wrote a story entitled, "The Fourth Law of Robotics". This Fourth Law states: "A robot must reproduce. As long as such reproduction does not interfere with the First or Second or Third Law."

In 2013 Hutan Ashrafian proposed an additional law that considered the role of artificial intelligence-on-artificial intelligence or the relationship between robots themselves – the so-called AIonAI law.{{cite journal |last= Ashrafian |first= Hutan| year= 2014|title= AIonAI: A Humanitarian Law of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics |journal= Science and Engineering Ethics |volume= 21 |issue= 1 |pages= 29–40 | doi= 10.1007/s11948-013-9513-9 |pmid= 24414678 |s2cid= 2821971}} This sixth law states: "All robots endowed with comparable human reason and conscience should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

In 2011, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) of United Kingdom jointly published a set of five ethical "principles for designers, builders and users of robots" in the real world, along with seven "high-level messages" intended to be conveyed, based on a September 2010 research workshop:{{cite web|title=Principles of robotics: Regulating Robots in the Real World|url=http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/research/ourportfolio/themes/engineering/activities/principlesofrobotics/|publisher=Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council|access-date=2011-10-03}}{{cite web|last=Winfield|first=Alan|title=Five roboethical principles – for humans|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21028111.100-five-roboethical-principles--for-humans.htm|publisher=New Scientist|access-date=2011-10-03}}

1. Robots should not be designed solely or primarily to kill or harm humans.
2. Humans, not robots, are responsible agents. Robots are tools designed to achieve human goals.
3. Robots should be designed in ways that assure their safety and security.
4. Robots are artifacts; they should not be designed to exploit vulnerable users by evoking an emotional response or dependency. It should always be possible to tell a robot from a human.
5. It should always be possible to find out who is legally responsible for a robot.

The messages intended to be conveyed were:

1. We believe robots have the potential to provide immense positive impact to society. We want to encourage responsible robot research.
2. Bad practice hurts us all.
3. Addressing obvious public concerns will help us all make progress.
4. It is important to demonstrate that we, as roboticists, are committed to the best possible standards of practice.
5. To understand the context and consequences of our research, we should work with experts from other disciplines, including: social sciences, law, philosophy and the arts.
6. We should consider the ethics of transparency: are there limits to what should be openly available?
7. When we see erroneous accounts in the press, we commit to take the time to contact the reporting journalists.

The EPSRC principles are broadly recognised as a useful starting point. In 2016 Tony Prescott organised a workshop to revise these principles, e.g. to differentiate ethical from legal principles.{{cite journal|date=2017|title=Legal vs. ethical obligations – a comment on the EPSRC's principles for robotics|url=https://philpapers.org/rec/MLLLVE|journal=Connection Science|doi=10.1080/09540091.2016.1276516|author=Müller, Vincent C.|volume=29 |issue=2 |pages=137–141 |bibcode=2017ConSc..29..137M |s2cid=19080722 }}

Another comprehensive terminological codification for the legal assessment of the technological developments in the robotics industry has already begun mainly in Asian countries.bcc.co.uk: Robot age poses ethical dilemma. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6425927.stm Link] This progress represents a contemporary reinterpretation of the law (and ethics) in the field of robotics, an interpretation that assumes a rethinking of traditional legal constellations. These include primarily legal liability issues in civil and criminal law.

In June 2016, Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft Corporation, had an interview with the Slate magazine and reflected on what kinds of principles and goals should be considered by industry and society when discussing artificial intelligences:{{Cite news|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2016/06/microsoft_ceo_satya_nadella_humans_and_a_i_can_work_together_to_solve_society.html|title=The Partnership of the Future|last=Nadella|first=Satya|date=2016-06-28|newspaper=Slate|issn=1091-2339|access-date=2016-06-30}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/29/12057516/satya-nadella-ai-robot-laws|title=Satya Nadella's rules for AI are more boring (and relevant) than Asimov's Three Laws|last=Vincent|first=James|date=2016-06-29|website=The Verge|publisher=Vox Media|access-date=2016-06-30}}

1. "A.I. must be designed to assist humanity", meaning human autonomy needs to be respected.
2. "A.I. must be transparent" meaning that humans should know and be able to understand how they work.
3. "A.I. must maximize efficiencies without destroying the dignity of people."
4. "A.I. must be designed for intelligent privacy" meaning that it earns trust through guarding their information.
5. "A.I. must have algorithmic accountability so that humans can undo unintended harm."
6. "A.I. must guard against bias" so that they must not discriminate against people.

Mark W. Tilden is a robotics physicist who was a pioneer in developing simple robotics.{{cite magazine| url=https://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.09/tilden.html?pg=1&topic= | magazine=Wired | first=Fred | last=Hapgood | title=Chaotic Robotics | issue = 9 | date = September 1994| volume=2 }}

Tilden later disparaged his earlier work as "wimpy" for having been based on the human-centric Asimov laws. He created three new guiding principles/rules for "wild" robots:{{cite web |first=Ashley |last=Dunn |url=http://partners.nytimes.com/library/cyber/surf/0605surf.html |title=Machine Intelligence, Part II: From Bumper Cars to Electronic Minds |work=The New York Times |date=1996-06-05 |accessdate=2009-07-26 }}{{cite web |url=http://makezine.com/06/beam/ |title=makezine.com: A Beginner's Guide to BEAM |quote=(Most of the article is subscription-only content.) }}

1. A robot must protect its existence at all costs.
2. A robot must obtain and maintain access to its own power source.
3. A robot must continually search for better power sources.

Within these three rules for "wild" life, Tilden is basically stating his goal as: "...proctoring a silicon species into sentience, but with full control over the specs. Not plant. Not animal. Something else."{{cite magazine| url=https://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.09/tilden.html?pg=2&topic= | magazine=Wired | first=Fred | last=Hapgood | title=Chaotic Robotics (continued) | issue = 9 | date = September 1994| volume=2 }}

• Friendly AI
• Roboethics
• Ethics of artificial intelligence
• Military robots which may be designed such that they violate Asimov's First Law.
• Three Laws of Transhumanism
• Clarke's three laws
• Niven's laws

{{reflist|30em}}17. Announcer (2011). Portal 2{{Robotics}}

Category:Robotics

Category:Robotics engineering