Verification Challenges for Autonomous Systems

  • Signe A. RedfieldEmail author
  • Mae L. Seto


In this chapter, some research challenges in the verification of autonomous systems are outlined. The objective was to identify existing available verification tools and their associated gaps, additional challenges for which there are no tools, and to make suggestions for directions in which progress may profitably be made. The chapter briefly touches on existing research to begin addressing these problems but there are more unexplored research challenges than there are programs underway to explore them. This chapter concludes with an enumeration of the unexplored challenges.



The authors would like to thank Andrew Bouchard and Richard Tatum at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Panama City, Florida, for their help with early version of this paper, and the Verification of Autonomous Systems Working Group, whose efforts help define the terminology and identify these challenges. Thanks, are also due to the United States Naval Research Laboratory and the Office of Naval Research for supporting this research.


  1. IEEE Standard Ontologies for Robotics and Automation (2015a), IEEE Std 1872-2015, 60 pages.Google Scholar
  2. IEEE Standard Ontologies for Robotics and Automation (2015b), P1872/D3, 55 pages.Google Scholar
  3. Albus, J., Huang, H. M., Messina, E., Murphy, K., Juberts, M., Lacaze, A., et al. (2000). 4D/RCS: A reference model architecture for unmanned vehicle systems version 2.0.Google Scholar
  4. Barltrop, K. J., Friberg, K. H., & Horvath, G. A. (2008). Automated generation and assessment of autonomous systems test cases. Aerospace Conference (pp. 1–10). IEEE.Google Scholar
  5. Billman, L., & Steinberg, M. (2007). Human system performance metrics for evaluation of mixed-initiative hterogeneous autonomys systems. Proceedings of 2007 Workshop on Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems (pp. 120–126). ACM.Google Scholar
  6. Castillo-Effen, M., & Visnevski, N. A. (2009). Analysis of autonomous deconfliction in unmanned aircraft systems for testing and evaluation. Aerospace Conference (pp. 1–12). IEEE.Google Scholar
  7. Chaki, S., & Giampapa, J. A. (2013). Probabilistic verification of coordinated multi-robot missions. In Model Checking Software (pp. 135–153). Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Cleary, M. E., Abramsom, M., Adams, M. B., & Kolitz, S. (2001). Metrics for embedded collaborative intelligent systems. NIST Special Publication.Google Scholar
  9. Defense Acquisition University Press. (2001, January). Systems Engineering Fundamentals. Retrieved 2016, from
  10. Dunbabin, M., & Marques, L. (2012, March). Robots for environmental monitoring: Significant advancements and applications. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 19(1), pp. 24–39.Google Scholar
  11. Durst, P. J., Gray, W., Nikitenko, A., Caetano, J., Trentini, M., & King, R. (2014). A framework for predicting the mission-specific performance of autonomous unmanned systems. IEEE/RSM International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, (pp. 1962–1969).Google Scholar
  12. Engelberger, J. (1974). Three million hours of robot field experience. Industrial Robot: An International Journal, 164–168.Google Scholar
  13. Ferri, G., Ferreira, F., Djapic, V., Petillot, Y., Palau, M., & Winfield, A. (2016). The eurathlon 2015 grand challenge: The first outdoor multi-domain search and rescue robotics competition - a marine perspective. Marine Technology Science Journal, 81–97(17).Google Scholar
  14. Gehr, J. D. (2009). Evaluating situation awareness of autonomous systems. In Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking of Intelligent Systems (pp. 93–111). Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Huang, H. M., Albus, J. S., Messina, R. L., Wade, R. L., & English, R. (2004). Specifying autonomy levels for unmanned systems: Interim report. Defence and Security (pp. 386–397). International Society for Optics and Photonics.Google Scholar
  16. Huang, H. M., Pavek, K., Novak, B., Albus, J., & Messina, E. (2005). A framework for autonomous levels for unmanned Systems (ALFUS). Proceedings of the AUVSI's Unmanned Systems North America.Google Scholar
  17. Jacoff, A., Huang, H. M., Messina, E., Virts, A., & Downs, A. (2010). Comprehensive standard test suites for the performance evaluation of mobile robots. Proceedings of the 10th Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems Workshop. ACM.Google Scholar
  18. Kress-Gazit, H., Wongpiromsarn, T., & Topcu, U. (1989). Correct, reactive, high-level robot control. Robotics and Automation Magazine, 18(3), pp. 65–74.Google Scholar
  19. McWilliams, G. T., Brown, M. A., Lamm, R. D., Guerra, C. J., Avery, P. A., Kozak, K. C., et al. (2007). Evaluation of autonomy in recent ground vehicles using the autonomy levelos for unmanned systems (alfus) framework. Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop on Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems (pp. 54–61). ACM.Google Scholar
  20. Miller, S., van den Berg, J., Fritz, M., Darrell, T., Goldberg, K., & Abbeel, P. (2011). A geometric approach to robotic laundry folding. International Journal of Robotics Research, 31(2), 249–267.Google Scholar
  21. Murphy, R. & Shields, J. (2012). Task Force Report: The Role of Autonomy in DoD Systems. Department of Defense, Defense Science Board.Google Scholar
  22. Paull, L., Severac, G., Raffo, G. V., Angel, J. M., Boley, H., Durst, P. J., et al. (2012). Towards an ontology for autonomous robots. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, (pp. 1359–1364).Google Scholar
  23. Pecheur, C. (2000). Validation and verification of autonomy software at NASA. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.Google Scholar
  24. Schultz, A. C., Grefenstett, J. J., & De Jong, K. A. (1993, October). Test and evaluation by genetic algorithms. IEEE Expert, 8(5), 9–14.Google Scholar
  25. Sholes, E. (2007). Evolution of a uav autonomy classification taxonomy. Aerospace Conference (pp. 1–16). IEEE.Google Scholar
  26. Smith, B., Millar, W., Dunphy, J., Tung, Y. W., Nayak, P., Gamble, E., et al. (1999). Validation and verification of the remote agent for spacecraft autonomy. Aerospace Conference. 1, pp. 449–468. IEEE.Google Scholar
  27. Smithers, T. (1995). On quantitative performance measures of robot behavior. In The Biology and Technology of Intelligent autonomous Agends (pp. 21–52). Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Steinberg, M. (2006). Intelligent autonomy for unmanned naval systems. Defense and Security Symposiukm (pp. 623013–623013). International Society for Optics and Photonics.Google Scholar
  29. Vassev, E., & Hinchey, M. (2013). On the autonomy requirements for space missions. IEEE 16th International Symposium on Object/Component/Service-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, (pp. 1–10).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U.S. Naval Research LaboratoryWashington, DCUSA
  2. 2.Dalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations