Toward a Science of Autonomy for Physical Systems: Defense
📝 Abstract
Militaries around the world have long been cognizant of the potential benefits associated with autonomous systems both in the conduct of warfare and in its prevention. This has lead to the declaration by some that this technology will lead to a fundamental change in the ways in which war is conducted, i.e., a revolution in military affairs (RMA) not unlike gunpowder, the long bow, the rifled bullet, the aircraft carrier, etc. Indeed the United States has created roadmaps for robotics with ever-increasing autonomous capability that span almost 40 years. These systems span air, sea, sea surface, littoral, ground and subterranean environments. There are serious societal and ethical concerns associated with the deployment of this technology that remain unaddressed. How can sufficient protection be afforded noncombatants? What about civilian blowback, where this technology may end up being used in policing operations against domestic groups? How can we protect the fundamental human rights of all involved? Considerable discussion is being conducted at an international level, including at the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) over the past two years, debating if and how such systems, particularly lethal platforms should be banned or regulated.
💡 Analysis
Militaries around the world have long been cognizant of the potential benefits associated with autonomous systems both in the conduct of warfare and in its prevention. This has lead to the declaration by some that this technology will lead to a fundamental change in the ways in which war is conducted, i.e., a revolution in military affairs (RMA) not unlike gunpowder, the long bow, the rifled bullet, the aircraft carrier, etc. Indeed the United States has created roadmaps for robotics with ever-increasing autonomous capability that span almost 40 years. These systems span air, sea, sea surface, littoral, ground and subterranean environments. There are serious societal and ethical concerns associated with the deployment of this technology that remain unaddressed. How can sufficient protection be afforded noncombatants? What about civilian blowback, where this technology may end up being used in policing operations against domestic groups? How can we protect the fundamental human rights of all involved? Considerable discussion is being conducted at an international level, including at the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) over the past two years, debating if and how such systems, particularly lethal platforms should be banned or regulated.
📄 Content
Toward a Science of Autonomy for Physical Systems: Defense
Ronald C. Arkin arkin@cc.gatech.edu Georgia Institute of Technology
Gaurav S. Sukhatme gaurav@usc.edu University of Southern California
Computing Community Consortium Version 1: June 23, 20151
Once more unto the breach…
Militaries around the world have long been cognizant of the potential benefits associated with autonomous systems both in the conduct of warfare and in its prevention. This has lead to the declaration by some that this technology will lead to a fundamental change in the ways in which war is conducted, i.e., a revolution in military affairs (RMA) not unlike gunpowder, the long bow, the rifled bullet, the aircraft carrier, etc. Indeed the United States has created roadmaps for robotics with ever-‐increasing autonomous capability that span almost 40 years2 These systems span air, sea, sea surface, littoral, ground and subterranean environments.
Why the interest? What advantages do autonomous systems afford the military? There are many, some of which include: • Force multiplication where one warfighter may now be able to do the task of many, reducing the overall number of soldiers required for a military operation. This argues favorably both from an economic perspective as well as the ability to avoid conscription, a politically indelicate issue. • Autonomous systems allow for an expansion of the battlespace, where operations involving greater persistence and longer endurance can be conducted over larger areas provide a strategic advantage. • Extending the individual warfighter’s reach allows the individual soldier to see further and strike further than would be otherwise available, increasing standoff distance from enemy threats. • The net effect is a potential reduction in friendly casualties
1 Contact: Ann Drobnis, Director, Computing Community Consortium (202-‐266-‐2936, adrobnis@cra.org). For the most recent version of this essay, as well as related essays, please visit: cra.org/ccc/resources/ccc-‐led-‐white-‐papers
2Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap: 2013-‐2028, http://www.defense.gov/pubs/DOD-‐ USRM-‐2013.pdf ; United States Air Force Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Plan 2009-‐ 2047, http://fas.org/irp/program/collect/uas_2009.pdf, accessed May 20, 2015.
2 There are serious societal and ethical concerns associated with the deployment of this technology that remain unaddressed. How can sufficient protection be afforded noncombatants? What about civilian blowback, where this technology may end up being used in policing operations against domestic groups? How can we protect the fundamental human rights of all involved? Considerable discussion is being conducted at an international level, including at the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) over the past two years, debating if and how such systems, particularly lethal platforms should be banned or regulated. Part of the problem lies in the definition of autonomy – it is far from universally agreed upon. A high-‐level definition is a good starti
This content is AI-processed based on ArXiv data.