Magnus Egerstedt is the Stacey Nicholas Dean of Engineering at the University of California, Irvine, where he leads the Henry Samueli School of Engineering. A renowned expert in robotics and control theory, Egerstedt joined UCI in July 2021 after a distinguished 20-year career at the Georgia Institute of Technology. At Georgia Tech, he served as the Steve W. Chaddick School Chair of the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering and was the executive director of the Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Machines.
Egerstedt is internationally recognized for his pioneering research on the control and coordination of complex networks, including multirobot systems, mobile sensor networks, and cyber-physical systems. Among his most notable recent achievements is the creation of the Robotarium, a remotely accessible swarm robotics laboratory at Georgia Tech. The Robotarium has enabled thousands of researchers worldwide to conduct experiments with multi-robot systems, significantly advancing the field of swarm robotics. He also led the development of SlothBot, a hyper-energy-efficient environmental monitoring robot designed for long-duration autonomy in natural environments.
Egerstedt's research has resulted in innovations in remote environmental monitoring, precision agriculture, and the design of robust, collaborative robotic systems. He is a fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Federation of Automatic Control, and a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences. His recent book, "Robot Ecology: Constraint-Based Design for Long-Duration Autonomy," explores the design principles behind robots that can operate independently in the wild for extended periods.
At UCI, Egerstedt is committed to fostering a collaborative, inclusive, and innovative engineering community, with a focus on interdisciplinary research and real-world impact.
Q: John Lanza - As the robotics industry continues to advance rapidly, what new regulatory challenges do you anticipate in the next year, especially in areas such as safety, data privacy, and autonomous decision-making?
A: Magnus Egerstedt - As robots become more integrated into our daily lives—think about robots in our homes, learning all sorts of things about us—the regulatory landscape is going to face some major and important challenges. Safety is at the forefront. Right now, AIs are not at the point where we can place absolute trust in them. We're not ready to "bet our lives" on AI systems—no autopilots, no fully autonomous decision-making in critical situations have yet to be deployed based solely on AI. The regulatory frameworks that exist today are not designed for the kinds of autonomy and learning that modern robots are starting to exhibit. We need new standards that address not just physical safety, but also the data privacy implications of robots that are constantly collecting information in personal spaces. There's a real need for regulations that can keep up with the pace of innovation, especially as robots move from controlled industrial settings into homes, hospitals, and public spaces.
Q: With the pace of innovation in robotics, how do you see the industry resolving the tension between intellectual property protection and collaboration and open innovation?
A: Robotics isn't fundamentally different from other high-tech industries in this respect. There's always a tension between protecting intellectual property and fostering open innovation. The field thrives on collaboration—many of the biggest advances come from open-source projects and shared research. At the same time, companies and researchers need to protect their inventions to justify the investment in R&D. I think we'll continue to see a mix: open platforms that allow for broad experimentation and collaboration, alongside proprietary technologies that drive commercial success. The key is to strike a balance that encourages both innovation and the sharing of knowledge, without stifling either.
Q: What ethical issues do you foresee becoming more prominent in the robotics space, especially with the increase in human-robot interaction?
A: The ethical landscape is evolving as robots become more present in society. One big issue pertains to the education of future AI professionals—we need to ensure that the people building these systems are not just technically skilled, but also attuned to the societal-scale questions their work raises. In fact, I feel strongly that technologists have to take more responsibility for the broader impacts of their creations. Social acceptance is another factor, and it's interestingly demographic—older generations, for example, tend to be more comfortable with humanoid-looking robots while younger users seem more agnostic to the shape and size of the robots. Beyond that, as robots become more lifelike and interactive, questions about privacy, consent, and the boundaries of human-robot relationships will become more pressing. We need to be proactive in addressing these issues, rather than waiting for problems to arise.
Q: As robotics systems become more connected and integrated with IoT, what are the biggest cybersecurity risks you anticipate, and how do you see the industry addressing these risks to ensure safety and compliance?
A: Cybersecurity is a huge concern as robots become more connected. The risks are not just about someone hacking into a robot and making it do something malicious—though that's certainly a worry—but also about the integrity of the data these systems collect and use. We need to enhance current cybersecurity practices to ensure assured autonomy and safe learning. In our lab, for example, we focus on developing systems that can learn safely, even in the presence of adversarial inputs. The industry as a whole needs to adopt similar approaches, building in security from the ground up rather than treating it as an afterthought.
Q: How do you see the robotics industry impacting workforce dynamics in the coming year, and what can be done to address potential disruptions?
A: The need for lifelong learning has never been greater. Universities and educational institutions need to rethink their degree models to prepare students for a world where the jobs that are replaced by robots are not necessarily the ones we expect. In fact, there's a premium on creativity, adaptability, and the ability to work alongside intelligent machines. The industry needs to invest in upskilling and reskilling programs, not just for engineers but for workers across all sectors. The jobs that robots are best at are the dull, dirty, and dangerous ones, but people are still needed to set up, program, and maintain these systems. We need to make sure that workers are equipped to take on these new roles.
Q: With robotics increasingly deployed in environments that impact public safety, what changes or new legal risks do you foresee emerging in terms of product liability and accountability?
A: This is one of the toughest questions facing the industry. When a robot makes a decision that leads to harm, who is responsible? Is it the manufacturer, the programmer, the operator, or the AI itself? The legal frameworks we have today are not well-suited to assigning blame in these situations. We're going to need new approaches to product liability and accountability that reflect the complexity of autonomous systems. This will likely involve a combination of updated regulations, industry standards, and perhaps even new forms of insurance or risk-sharing.
Q: In what ways is the industry considering environmental sustainability as a factor in its development and deployment of robotics solutions, and what challenges or opportunities does that present?
A: Sustainability is a critical issue. Right now, too much energy is consumed by the compute required for advanced AI and robotics. We need to develop more energy-efficient algorithms and hardware, and to think about the entire lifecycle of robotic systems—from manufacturing to disposal. There's a real opportunity here for the industry to lead in developing sustainable technologies, but it's going to require a concerted effort across research, development, and deployment.
Q: Do you foresee any challenges in securing necessary components due to global supply chain constraints, and how can companies ensure consistent production and delivery?
A: Supply chain issues are definitely a challenge, especially with tariffs and geopolitical tensions complicating things. Companies need to be proactive in diversifying their supply chains, building up inventories of critical components, and developing relationships with suppliers in allied countries. It's not an easy problem to solve, but it's essential for ensuring consistent production and delivery.
Q: In 10 years, do you think robots will be more likely to host a late-night talk show, compete in a sports league, or write the next hit Netflix series—and why?
A: Netflix—for sure. Writing is something that AI is already getting pretty good at, and I think we'll see robots and AI systems creating content that's increasingly indistinguishable from what humans produce. That said, physics is hard, and humor is even harder! Hosting a talk show or competing in sports requires a level of physical dexterity and social intelligence that's still a long way off. But I wouldn't rule it out entirely—robots with unique personalities could make for some very entertaining television.
Q: If robots were to develop their own version of 'robot holidays,' what kind of celebrations or traditions do you think they'd have, and how might humans get involved?
A: I love the idea of "hive mind" holidays—maybe software upgrade days, where robots celebrate receiving new capabilities. Humans could get involved by participating in these upgrades, maybe even designing special events or challenges to mark the occasion. It's a fun way to think about the intersection of technology and culture.
Q: If robots could have hobbies, what kind of hobbies do you think they'd pick up, and how might they compete or collaborate with humans in those areas?
A: The idea of robots with hobbies and free time is fascinating. I think we'll see more curiosity-driven learning, where robots explore and experiment just for the sake of learning, rather than to accomplish a specific goal. In fact, I have increasingly gotten fascinated by ideas surrounding what""robots of leisure" would spend their time doing. In terms of hobbies, I certainly don't have the answer. That's for the robots to decide. But if I were to guess, maybe they would take up things like solving puzzles, explore new environments, or even collaborate with humans on creative projects. The possibilities are endless, and I think we'll see some really interesting collaborations as robots become more autonomous and expressive.
Q: What's one movie or TV show about robots that you think gets the future completely wrong, and what would a more realistic version look like?
A: Terminator gets it wrong in a big way—walking is actually much harder than thinking given the current state of technology! The "HAL" piece—the intelligent, conversational AI—is the more established part. One of the biggest current challenges is designing robots that can move and interact with the physical world as fluidly as humans do.
Q: If robots one day could develop their own unique personalities, what kind of 'quirky robot friend' would you personally want to hang out with?
A: Marvin the Paranoid Android from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy would be a lot of fun. I think we're going to see more robots with distinct personalities and styles, and I'm looking forward to seeing what kinds of relationships people develop with these new companions. You know how dogs and their owners start to resemble each other? I would not be surprised if we see something similar emerge between humans and their robotic companions.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
