Hi ROS community,
I have refactored my previous ros2_kinematic_guard work into a broader package called runtime_integrity. The motivation is still very concrete on the engineering side:
/cmd_vel is still being published,
but the robot’s physical motion no longer matches the command stream.
Why the audit angle matters
As EU AI Act logging and human-oversight obligations approach for high-risk AI systems, runtime evidence is becoming more important. I do not claim this package “makes a robot compliant”, and it does not replace safety-rated PLCs, safety scanners, or hardware E-stops.
The narrower goal is to provide machine-readable execution-integrity evidence that can support:
- engineering diagnostics,
- incident reconstruction,
- operator dashboards,
- audit logs,
- and human-oversight workflows.
Integration model
The current ROS 2 implementation remains non-invasive:
Controller Server / planner / teleop
↓
/cmd_vel
↓
runtime_integrity
↓
/safe_cmd_vel
↓
base driver
It can start in observe mode, so it does not require changes to Nav2 controllers, BT XML, or base-driver code.
The README now focuses less on “wheel slip detection” and more on runtime accountability, execution-integrity evidence, and audit/HMI integration hooks.
Repository:
https://github.com/ZC502/runtime_integrity
Looking forward to your feedback regarding the planned enterprise audit event schema and integration hooks!