News · Research
Humanoid robot safety and standards — an evidence checklist
Source: ISO / Agility Robotics
Lead strip: Status: standards in progress / vendor claims uneven · Availability: industrial floors vs home ≠ same rulebook · All-in cues: “collaborative” ≠ certified · Scoring: methodology
Evidence checklist — not a sold ranking and not a “best supplier” trophy. Vendor safety slides ≠ published field evaluation ≠ finalized ISO Type-C coverage for walking robots.
Buyers hear “safe around people,” “collaborative,” and “barrier-free” in almost every humanoid pitch. Those words are not interchangeable with a completed risk assessment, a stop-behavior test you can witness, or a published standards path. This brief is an evidence checklist: what classes of claim exist in 2026, what is still draft, and what to ask before a walking machine shares aisle space with people. Criteria: methodology.
Robot strips (context, not a trophy board)
- Digit · Agility Robotics · Status: Digit 4 field / Digit 5 announced · Use: warehouse logistics · Evidence: OSHA-framed field evaluation claim + Digit 5 cooperative-safety architecture · → /robots/digit/
- Figure 03 · Figure AI · Status: Pilot (BMW Spartanburg sequencing) · Use: factory logistics · Evidence: partner plant project; public stop-protocol dossier — · → /robots/figure-03/
- NEO · 1X Technologies · Status: Pre-order (consumer-oriented) · Use: home · Evidence: soft/compliant design claims; residential fleet safety ledger thinner · → /robots/neo/
Rule one: industrial robot safety ≠ biped fall physics
ISO 10218-1/-2 (2025 revision) remains the flagship industrial-robot safety framework. The 2025 update pulled collaborative application methods into the main text (absorbing concepts from the former ISO/TS 15066 era), added cybersecurity as a safety-relevant topic, and stressed that only an application can be collaborative — never the robot alone. Classic collaborative methods include monitored stop, hand guiding, speed-and-separation monitoring (SSM), and power-and-force limiting (PFL).
That package was written for industrial robots and their integration. It does not fully own the distinctive hazards of actively balanced locomotion: power-loss collapse, topple/fall zones, recovery after a trip, and balance loss while carrying a payload in a human aisle.
ISO 25785-1 is the Type-C work item aimed at that gap: safety requirements for dynamically stable industrial mobile robots (legged, wheeled, or other actively controlled stability) in industrial environments (ISO 25785-1 page). Scope language focuses on robots that can become unstable without active control; exclusions include continuous human remote driving and non-industrial environments. As of 2026 it is committee / draft track, not a finished buyer certificate you can hang on a PO.
ANSI/A3 TR R15.108 is the parallel U.S./Canada technical-report track for dynamically stable industrial mobile robots (including humanoid-shaped platforms). Agility states it is a project leader/contributor on both R15.108 and ISO 25785-1 (Digit 5 unveil). A technical report under development is guidance in progress, not a completed certification.
Buyer cue: ask which document the vendor’s risk file maps to today — 10218 application, draft 25785/R15.108 language, OEM internal FMEA, or marketing only. If the answer is only a demo video, write —.
Vendor claims vs verifiable stop behavior
| Claim class | What careful buyers can ask for | Unsafe reading |
|---|---|---|
| Detection → avoid / stop / sit | Witnessed stop latency, sensor suite, independent safety controller | “Barrier-free forever” |
| Independent safety controller | Dual-channel architecture docs; what happens on compute fault | Software “AI safety” alone |
| Field evaluation / OSHA-framed test | Evaluator identity, protocol, site, date, residual risks | “OSHA certified humanoid” without paperwork |
| CE / UKCA path | Notified-body plan and target marks | Shipping date = compliance date |
| Soft covers / tendon compliance | Useful home cue; still needs residential misuse analysis | Soft exterior = no residual risk |
| “Collaboratively safe” branding | Map to SSM/PFL/application risk file | Synonym for finished ISO 25785 |
Digit: densest public safety narrative (still vendor-framed)
Agility’s Digit 5 materials claim Digit became the first humanoid to pass an independent field evaluation on a customer production line for industrial safety standards administered in an OSHA framing, then describe Digit 5 additions: safe human detection (avoid / stop / seated position), visual and auditory motion cues, and an independent safety controller overseeing unsafe-distance response. Agility also frames CE and related marks for planned EU/UK commercial path (Digit 5 unveil; product caveats on preliminary/pre-production features: Digit 5 product).
Keep generations separate: Digit 4 field hours/totes are not Digit 5’s cooperative-safety architecture until Digit 5 ships and logs its own. Product page: Digit.
Still ask for: evaluator name, protocol ID, residual risk register, and which generation was on the floor.
Figure 03: partner plant ≠ published stop dossier
BMW Group’s public statement places Figure 03 into complex sequencing applications in logistics at Spartanburg after a completed Figure 02 body-shop history (BMW Group). That is strong partner-stated industrial intent. A public, buyer-auditable stop-behavior / standards mapping package comparable to Agility’s Digit 5 safety narrative remains — on open web materials we score. Figure 02 ≠ Figure 03. Page: Figure 03.
NEO: home compliance is a different problem
NEO markets soft covers, Tendon Drive compliance, and consumer checkout ($20,000 Early Access or $499/month — vendor). Softness and compliance are design cues, not a substitute for residential misuse, child/pet interaction, or remote-assistance safety cases. Industrial ISO 10218 / draft 25785 do not automatically clear a dwelling. Independent large-scale household safety ledger: thinner than Digit-class industrial narratives.
Evidence checklist buyers can run in a workshop
- Stop behavior demo — approach path, latency, seated/fall strategy, what happens on sensor occlusion.
- Power-loss / E-stop — does the biped collapse, freeze, or controlled sit? Who owns the fall zone?
- Independent safety path — separate from the AI stack that learned the task.
- Application collaborative? — per 10218 logic, collaboration is application-level; get the risk assessment, not a robot nickname.
- Standards map — 10218 today; 25785 / R15.108 status (draft vs published); CE/UKCA plan if EU/UK.
- Generation lock — Digit 4 ≠ Digit 5; Figure 02 ≠ Figure 03.
- Environment lock — warehouse aisle ≠ home living room; do not copy industrial marks onto consumer SKUs.
- Refuse supplier trophies — we do not crown a “safest humanoid supplier.”
Practical takeaway
Safety marketing is ahead of finished biped-specific ISO Type-C publication. Digit’s public OSHA-framed evaluation claim and Digit 5 architecture disclosure are the densest industrial narrative among the platforms we track — still vendor-framed until you hold the protocol. Figure 03’s BMW sequencing project proves plant access, not a public stop dossier. NEO’s soft/home story needs residential evidence, not warehouse KPIs. Score claims under methodology; leave unknowns as —.
FAQ
Is there a finished ISO standard just for humanoids?
Not as a published, humanoid-named Type-C you can buy against today. ISO 25785-1 addresses dynamically stable industrial mobile robots (including bipeds) and remains on the standards development track. Until publication, buyers lean on ISO 10218 application practice, national guidance (e.g. ANSI/A3 TR R15.108 in progress), and OEM risk files.
Does “collaborative robot” mean the humanoid is certified safe?
No. Under modern 10218 framing, collaborative describes an application with specific protective measures — not a robot brand adjective. Demand the application risk assessment.
Did Digit get “OSHA certified”?
Agility claims an independent field evaluation on a customer production line framed around industrial safety standards administered in an OSHA context. Ask for evaluator, protocol, and residual risks. Do not equate a vendor-stated evaluation with a generic “OSHA certified” sticker without paperwork.
Can I use warehouse safety evidence for a home robot?
No. Industrial and residential environments have different misuse models, users, and standards families. Keep Digit logistics evidence separate from NEO home claims.
Sources
- Agility Robotics: Digit 5 unveil · Digit 5 product
- ISO: ISO 25785-1 (dynamically stable industrial mobile robots)
- BMW Group: Figure 03 Spartanburg
- Robotscomparison: methodology · Digit · Figure 03 · NEO
Published stop-protocol PDFs for every vendor, residual risk registers, and finalized ISO 25785 text: — where not public.