Contain
Set physical, field, procedural and environmental boundaries before release.
Deployment evaluation · 16
Containment, retrieval and accounting
Define how every robot, module, particle or material reaches a known safe state after success, failure, loss of observation or aborted mission.
Evidence statusResearch-frontier evidence framework · stage, material, control and retrieval validation requiredLast reviewed: 16 August 2026
16
FUURAA thesis
End-of-mission accountability is a core capability, not a cleanup footnote.
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.
Recover
Test capture, neutralisation, extraction, biodegradation and residual detection.
Account
Reconcile released, active, recovered, degraded, damaged and missing units or mass.
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 is the maximum credible loss?
- 02
Can residual material be detected below a defined threshold?
- 03
Who authorises release and closes the mission?
- 04
What response follows incomplete accounting?
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
Release authorisation and containment map
- 02
Evidence package 2
Recovery and neutralisation validation
- 03
Evidence package 3
Mass or unit balance with discrepancy actions
Scope boundary
State what this evidence still cannot be generalised to.
- 01
A claim of biodegradation is not equivalent to verified degradation time, products, exposure and residual risk in the intended environment.
- 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
U.S. Food and Drug Administration · Final guidance 2014-06 · verified 2026-08-16
↗02Considering whether an FDA-regulated product involves nanotechnology
Explains that dimension-dependent properties may require particular, product-specific attention to safety, effectiveness, quality and regulatory status.
ETH Zurich · Published 2025-11-13 · verified 2026-08-16
↗03Magnetically guided microrobots for targeted drug delivery
Integrates a soluble capsule, magnetic navigation, X-ray visibility, catheter release and drug delivery, with testing in vascular models and large animals.
Harvard SEAS · Published 2014-08-14 · verified 2026-08-16
↗A self-organizing thousand-robot swarm
Shows that a large physical swarm can self-organise from local interactions and that real hardware exposes variability and failure modes hidden by simulation.