REVIEW 6 cited by
Towards Robust and Secure Embodied AI: A Survey on Vulnerabilities and Attacks
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Embodied AI systems, including robots and autonomous vehicles, are increasingly integrated into real-world applications, where they encounter a range of vulnerabilities stemming from both environmental and system-level factors. These vulnerabilities manifest through sensor spoofing, adversarial attacks, and failures in task and motion planning, posing significant challenges to robustness and safety. Despite the growing body of research, existing reviews rarely focus specifically on the unique safety and security challenges of embodied AI systems. Most prior work either addresses general AI vulnerabilities or focuses on isolated aspects, lacking a dedicated and unified framework tailored to embodied AI. This survey fills this critical gap by: (1) categorizing vulnerabilities specific to embodied AI into exogenous (e.g., physical attacks, cybersecurity threats) and endogenous (e.g., sensor failures, software flaws) origins; (2) systematically analyzing adversarial attack paradigms unique to embodied AI, with a focus on their impact on perception, decision-making, and embodied interaction; (3) investigating attack vectors targeting large vision-language models (LVLMs) and large language models (LLMs) within embodied systems, such as jailbreak attacks and instruction misinterpretation; (4) evaluating robustness challenges in algorithms for embodied perception, decision-making, and task planning; and (5) proposing targeted strategies to enhance the safety and reliability of embodied AI systems. By integrating these dimensions, we provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the interplay between vulnerabilities and safety in embodied AI.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
Experimental Evidence That AI-Managed Workers Tolerate Lower Pay Without Demotivation
Workers paid 40% less by a rule-based AI manager reported no loss of fairness or motivation, while a harsher decision-tree AI did trigger backlash.
-
AdvNav: Behavior-Guided Black-Box Adversarial Attacks on Vision-Language Navigation
AdvNav is a gradient-free attack that overlays Perlin noise on a VLN agent's camera and uses behavior feedback plus genetic search, breaking 49.70-87.30% of successful R2R navigations.
-
Self-Evolving Just-In-Time Memory for Proactive Embodied Safety
A Just-In-Time Memory framework with graph-based state tracking and self-evolving safety skills improves safe task completion in household robots by up to 30 percentage points on IS-Bench.
-
ANNIE: Be Careful of Your Robots
The authors build a safety-centered benchmark and attack method that induces vision-language-action robot policies to violate ISO-based safety rules in a majority of tested episodes.
-
Security of World-Model-Based Embodied AI: A Lifecycle of Threats, Defenses, and Evaluation
World-model-based embodied AI creates a predictive security boundary where attacks on data, sensors, imagination, ranking, and feedback can turn into unsafe physical action and false safety certificates.
-
Embodied AI: Emerging Risks and Opportunities for Policy Action
A policy analysis arguing that embodied AI risks are real, under-covered by current US/EU/UK frameworks, and best handled through certification, benchmarks, clarified liability, and economic adaptation.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.