Independent monitoring hardware and data platform for robots operating in public spaces. Because the public deserves to know what's rolling through their streets.
Autonomous robots are multiplying across American campuses and cities — over 9 million deliveries and counting, with security, cleaning, and service robots not far behind. But the companies operating these robots control all the data: where they go, how fast they travel, what incidents occur.
Cities and campuses don't have an independent way to verify any of it. When something goes wrong, there's no neutral record. When a city wants to plan infrastructure or enforce permits, they're relying on self-reported data from the companies they're supposed to regulate.
The result is a transparency gap — a growing disconnect between the scale of robot operations in public space and the public's ability to oversee them.
Studied delivery robots for six months, then banned them unanimously — citing lack of confidence in the safety data provided by operators.
Enacted an emergency six-month moratorium on all delivery robot permits while the city developed an oversight policy from scratch.
Thousands of residents signed petitions demanding transparency on robot operations and accessibility data. The city had no independent information to offer.
A compact tracking device attached to each robot — owned by a neutral third party, not the robot company — paired with a data platform that gives cities and campuses the information they need.
A working mockup of the monitoring dashboard a city would use. Five toggleable layers surface the questions policymakers ask: where robots meet infrastructure, how they interact with pedestrians, where system failures cluster, who gets served, and what data is being collected.
Every annotation includes an expandable policy-tool card mapping the signal to an existing municipal instrument. Open in a new tab →
Different stakeholders, shared need for independent data.
Cities need to enforce permits, investigate incidents, and plan infrastructure — all impossible without independent operational data.
Campus dining and facilities teams want to optimize delivery operations, maintain infrastructure, and resolve complaints with real data.
Operators who adopt independent monitoring gain a competitive advantage: easier permits, proactive trust-building, and liability protection.
The question isn't whether cities will demand independent data — it's when.
Municipal code requires data sharing capabilities and monthly incident reporting for all autonomous robot permits.
Law 22-137 establishes data sharing with local government as a condition of personal delivery device pilot programs.
HB 1325 requires operators to generate accident reports and imposes fines for property damage.
International standard in development for data, procedures, and protocols governing autonomous robot operations in public spaces.
Knoxville, Kirkland, and NYC have all acted against robots without confidence in the available data.
Over 20 US states have autonomous robot legislation, but local requirements vary widely — creating demand for a unified standard.
Early stage, strong foundation.
Comprehensive analysis of regulatory landscape across 20+ states, competitive dynamics, and stakeholder needs based on original research including a 547-bill legislative dataset.
Core technology concepts documented and protected. Patent application in development.
Conversations with campus dining services, city officials, facilities teams, and robot operators to validate product-market fit.
Exploring partnerships with universities and cities for initial deployments of the monitoring system.
We're looking for pilot partners, municipal collaborators, and investors who understand that autonomous systems in public space require independent accountability.