Comment | Published:

A definition for robotics as an academic discipline

To develop scientific methods for evaluation in robotics, the field requires a more stringent definition of the subject of study, says Signe Redfield, focusing on capabilities instead of physical systems.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    Birk, A. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 18, 94–95 (December, 2011).

  2. 2.

    McKerrow, P. J. Robotics 2, 267–274 (1986).

  3. 3.

    Flynn, A. M. & Brooks, R. in Proc. 1988 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 611–617 (1988).

  4. 4.

    Jiménez-Fabián, R. & Verlinden, O. Med. Eng. Phys. 34, 397–404 (2012).

  5. 5.

    Moustris, G. P., Hiridis, S. C., Deliparaschos, K. M. & Konstantinidis, K. M. Int. J. Med. Robot. Comp. 7, 375–392 (2011).

  6. 6.

    Luo, S., Bimbo, J., Dahiva, R. & Liu, H. Mechatronics 48, 54–67 (2017).

  7. 7.

    Bu, L., Babu, R. & De Schutter, B. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 38, 156–172 (2008).

  8. 8.

    Braitenberg, V. Vehicles: Experiments in Synthetic Psychology (MIT Press, 1984).

  9. 9.

    Bonsignorio, F. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 24, 178–182 (September, 2017).

Download references


The author would like to thank A. Bouchard, V. Edwards and R. Tatum, who consistently pointed at the right path; the attendees and co-organizers of the 2018 NIST Verification of Autonomous Systems Working Group meeting and the 2018 NATO SCI-313 Specialists’ Meeting, which triggered the development of this work; D. Scheidt, C. Schlenoff, D. Sofge, M. Seto and J. Sustersic, who helped me clarify my thoughts; and Joe Hays and Jamie Lennon, who provided consistent support.

Author information

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Correspondence to Signe Redfield.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark