Security robots are starting to join the ranks of human guards; here's what we know

(CNN) – From New York to Hawaii, security robots equipped with a suite of sensors can be seen patrolling the perimeters of some residential communities and apartment buildings.

Security robots are fast becoming a viable complement to human security guards, raising concerns about privacy issues and potential job losses in the security sector. Critics also question their effectiveness in protecting citizens.

Demonstrating its capabilities as a reliable security solution is difficult – there is a lack of public data to prove this. However, experts and manufacturers say that its real strength lies in working alongside security agents with its advanced technologies.

Here's what we know about security robots.

Security robots possess a number of tools that humans lack, making them unique partners for security systems:

Security robots can operate 24/7 and excel at repetitive aspects of the job, such as sitting at a station or traveling a set route. Robots enable humans to perform practical tasks that require empathy and sympathy.

The K5 security robot is the best-known product from California-based robotics and security technology company Knightscope.

These robots are not equipped with any kind of lethal force, according to Knightscope co-founder and executive vice president Stacy Stephens.

Knightscope isn’t the only security robot manufacturer, either. Artificial intelligence and robotics company Cobalt AI makes a security robot that patrols hallways, offices and indoor facilities.

It has a built-in screen that allows interaction between humans in real time, enabling remote communication between security agents and people on site.

Advanced robotics company Boston Dynamics makes a line of robots called “Spot,” which are used by police departments, manufacturers and construction companies. Their primary goals are to detect dangerous gases like carbon monoxide and navigate hazardous environments unsafe for humans.

Jay Stanley, a policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), acknowledges that security robots' unique ability lies in performing tasks and navigating areas that are unsafe for humans.

Security robots are roaming some streets in Atlanta and San Diego, among other US cities, and their presence is extending to police departments, where they are integrated into police operations.

In 2023, New York Mayor Eric Adams and the New York City Police Department unveiled a Knightscope K5 to patrol Times Square and the city's subway network accompanied by a police officer.

In February, the New York Police Department confirmed that the robot had completed its testing period and had been removed from the streets. No further information was available on why the robot was no longer in service in the city.

Earlier this year, Massachusetts State Police deployed a Boston Dynamics Spot, a four-legged robot, during a seven-hour standoff with a suspect in Boston, according to WHDHCNN affiliate. The robot Roscoe was shot while trying to locate the attacker.

Three K5 robots were deployed in San Diego earlier this year, according to CNN affiliate KFMB. One of them patrols an apartment community in Claremont, where it operates 24/7 to keep residents safe and ward off car thieves, according to the robot's operator.

Earlier this month, an Atlanta apartment building deployed a K5 security robot, according to CNN affiliate WANF. Walk the sidewalks outside buildings to monitor the perimeter and protect residents.

John Hassard, loss prevention and security expert at Robson Forensic, says the greatest strength of security robots is their ability to serve as a highly customizable extension of an existing security system.

“They’re not supposed to be commodities, so if someone buys them, they already have a pretty good camera system that they’ve reasonably optimized,” he said. “This extends it. It makes that camera system more valuable.”

For example, Knightscope's robots are designed to collaborate with existing security infrastructure and surveillance systems, according to Stephens.

Knightscope provides security software that enables robots to issue alerts when an anomaly is detected. Depending on the situation and the sensor used to detect a problem, an alert will be issued to the security system or department where the robot is deployed and a guard will be requested to investigate the problem.

Robots can also be programmed for various exits based on the sensors they use. Robots deployed in a parking lot with license plate recognition can create lists of license plates to flag and alert security personnel.

Hassard also believes that security operations can reduce the number of guards they deploy with these devices, provided the location already has an effective surveillance infrastructure in place.

“You could reduce the number of security guards by replacing them with this,” he said. “By default, this thing doesn’t take breaks, it doesn’t sleep, and you know exactly what its responses are going to be.”

Experts and a robot manufacturer CNN spoke to agree on the deterrent capabilities of security robots.

“When people walk onto a campus and see a big robot that’s five feet tall, five feet wide, 400 pounds and has ‘security’ or ‘police’ written on it, that’s what people start thinking,” Knightscope’s Stephens said.

According to Paul Scharre, executive vice president of the Center for a New American Security, the physical deterrence capabilities of robots can help defuse situations that could be exacerbated by the presence of a police officer.

“If someone vandalizes a robot, you have a video recording of them committing an act of vandalism, you find that person and you prosecute them,” he explained. “No lives are lost, no one is affected by the incident.”

However, Scharre said robots can cause incidents because they have a physical presence.

“If the robot is labeled in some way, such as a security robot or a police robot, it could be perceived by people as intrusive and intruding on their privacy,” he said.

What is not known, however, is what the data say about the robots' deterrent effectiveness, Hassard said. The lack of data could be due to companies not wanting to admit they have security problems, he added.

“Deterrence is a very important thing in security, because we don’t want to catch people doing things. We want to prevent them from doing them, which is difficult to measure,” he said.

Stanley of the ACLU said security robots could be a privacy nightmare for citizens.

“If these robots are making decisions about who to monitor based on artificial intelligence, it raises huge questions about profiling, impartiality and transparency,” he explained.

The lack of transparency of the robots’ algorithms and intelligence is what concerns Stanley. In the event that someone has an adverse interaction with the robot, there should be legal liability protections put in place by whoever operates the robot, he said.

“And this applies to any type of artificial intelligence device, whether it is a robot or a simple algorithm that runs on software,” he said.

For example, Knightscope's robots don't have access to national crime databases, and its mobile models aren't equipped with facial recognition software, Stephens said. However, Knightscope makes a stationary model of the K5 that can use facial recognition software.

People need to start thinking about how to interact with robots as they become more advanced, Scharre said.

“When security robots start to be deployed, we need to think about how we interact with technology, how we perceive it and how people respond to it,” he said.

A future with more advanced and intelligent security robots, capable of more automated law enforcement and surveillance, could be an issue that needs to be addressed down the road, Stanley said.

While the sight of security robots patrolling our streets seems like a glimpse of what's to come, that future remains uncertain without a proven track record to back it up.

These robots are not immune to malfunctions, nor are they programmed to perfection. In 2016, a K5 ran over and slightly injured a toddler at a California shopping mall. The following year, Another K5 crashed into a fountain in an office building in Washington, DC.

Those failures and lack of data raise another question. Stanley questions why a security or police department would choose to buy a robot instead of traditional options, such as static surveillance systems or human security guards.

“I find it hard to imagine them being able to work on the market anytime soon when there are other technologies that can do the job, and when humans can simply do the job.”