Variation
Choose task-relevant factors and combinations.
Deployment evaluation · 14
Reliability distribution
Publish repeated-trial outcomes across objects, layouts, lighting, disturbances and operators, including the tail of failures.
Evidence statusEngineering evidence framework · task and site validation requiredLast reviewed: 14 August 2026
14
FUURAA thesis
The distribution of outcomes is more useful than an average or curated success rate.
Engineering map
Turn the title into engineering objects that can be observed, measured and reviewed.
Each layer states the boundary to establish and the evidence needed for the next decision.
Outcome
Preserve time, quality, damage and assistance.
Tail
Classify rare, severe and repeated failure modes.
Verification questions
Write the questions first, then decide whether a demo, test, pilot or operating record can answer them.
Each question needs an object, conditions, denominator, threshold and accountable decision owner.
- 01
What population does sampling represent?
- 02
Are failures censored or retried?
- 03
How wide is uncertainty?
- 04
Which failures dominate operational loss?
Evidence to preserve
Enable the next reader to reconstruct conditions, results, failures and the decision.
A conclusion alone loses reviewability; raw records, configuration and exclusions matter too.
- 01
Evidence package 1
Trial-level distribution
- 02
Evidence package 2
Confidence and sampling record
- 03
Evidence package 3
Failure-mode Pareto and severity
Scope boundary
State what this evidence still cannot be generalised to.
- 01
A small homogeneous trial set cannot establish long-tail reliability in changing real sites.
- 02
This is an engineering reading and decision framework; it does not replace application-specific risk assessment, conformity work, procurement acceptance or professional advice.
Sources and evidence status
Read standards scope, measurement evidence and application conclusions separately.
Source dates and review status remain visible; external sources open in a new tab.
01
NIST · Updated 2024-08-16 · verified 2026-08-14
↗02Standard test methods for response robots
Develops repeatable measures for mobility, manipulation, sensing, endurance, communications, operator proficiency, logistics and safety.
ISO · Published 2026-07-24
↗ISO 18646-5:2026 — Locomotion performance for legged robots
Defines methods for specifying and evaluating locomotion performance of complete legged robots.