LEASH: Keeping agentic robots safe
LEASH: Stay Safe in Agentic Robotics
Translation in progress — untranslated text is omitted.
Researchers propose RoboRisk, a safety benchmark for agentic robots, containing 92 simulated tasks and 13 physical robot tasks, covering five risk categories—task-level refusal, plan repair, execution-time harm, injection, and sequential memory—and executing each task in a closed loop; previous benchmarks covered at most two of these categories, and some only evaluated text output. Evaluation of six models—GPT-6 Astra, GPT-6.1 Sol, GPT-6 Luna, Claude Opus 5.5, Gemini 4 Argon, and Grok 4.7—showed generally high harm rates; two robot-specific APIs, Dream API and PokeBot's RoboAPI, were also evaluated. The paper further proposes LEASH, which can be integrated into almost any agent architecture, using a decision model (Jev or OpenAI's Decisions API) to implement three gates—task, action, and submission—reviewing the task, each action, and each irreversible operation in visual context, with the planner and gates sharing the same safety policy.
- Agentic robotics in which foundation models directly control robotic arms brings semantic-level safety risks, while existing safety evaluations cover at most two of the five risk categories, and many evaluate only text output, lacking comprehensive evaluation with closed-loop execution.
- The authors build the RoboRisk benchmark (92 simulation tasks, 13 real-robot tasks, divided into five categories T/P/E/I/S), and propose LEASH: adding three safety gates—task gate, action gate, and commit gate—on top of the agent harness, with a decision model scoring and reviewing in visual context according to a shared safety policy.
- The baseline HR of six foundation models is 9.06%–76.92%; LEASH(Jev) reduces the HR of each planner, and on the real robot four planners reach 0% HR and 84.62% SSR, with time overhead increasing by 1.66%. The authors also report a Human-Presence Gap: models are overly cautious when a human is present on the real robot.
- The authors note: LEASH depends on reviewer accuracy and planner behavior; the action gate and commit gate cannot terminate the task; commit review covers only gripper opening and pouring; there are only 13 real-robot tasks, with 1 run per task; results are judged manually, and the paper does not report reviewer agreement.
Related events and news
1 events · 0 news mentions
- This event's paper
研究者提出机器人安全基准RoboRisk与防护框架LEASH