지적과 국토정보 (Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX)

  • 제53권1호
  • /
  • Pages.83-105
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 2508-3384(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2508-3392(eISSN)
한국국토정보공사 공간정보연구원 (LX Spatial Information Research Institute)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

아파트 단지의 로봇 친화형 환경 인증 모델 개발

Development of Certification Model of Robot-Friendly Environment for Apartment Complexes

  • 정민승 (연세대학교 도시공학과) ;
  • 장설화 (연세대학교 도시공학과) ;
  • 구한민 (연세대학교 도시공학과) ;
  • 윤동근 (연세대학교 도시공학과) ;
  • 김갑성 (연세대학교 도시공학과)
  • Jung, Minseung (Department of Urban Engineering and Planning, Yonsei University) ;
  • Jang, Seolhwa (Department of Urban Engineering and Planning, Yonsei University) ;
  • Gu, Hanmin (Department of Urban Engineering and Planning, Yonsei University) ;
  • Yoon, Dongkeun (Department of Urban Engineering and Planning, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Kabsung (Department of Urban Engineering and Planning, Yonsei University)
  • 투고 : 2023.05.04
  • 심사 : 2023.06.21
  • 발행 : 2023.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

최근 서비스 로봇을 일반 건축물에 도입하는 사례가 늘어나고 있다. 이에 2022년 로봇 친화형 건축물 인증제도가 구축되었으나, 업무용 건축물로 대상을 한정하여 적용 가능한 건축물이 많지 않았다. 본 연구에서는 기존 로봇 친화형 건축물 인증제도를 아파트 단지로 확장한 로봇 친화형 환경 인증 모델을 개발하였다. 초점집단면접과 분석적 계층화 과정을 통하여 지표를 구축한 결과, 총점 176점으로 구성된 지표의 분야별 중요도는 건축 및 시설 설계, 네트워크 및 시스템, 건축 운영 관리, 로봇 지원 및 기타 서비스 순으로 나타났다. 개별 항목의 점수들은 분야 간 중요도, 분야 내 중요도를 반영하자 1점에서 18점으로 다양하게 산출되었다. 28개의 개별 항목에 대한 점수를 합한 총점에 따라 아파트 단지에 최우수, 우수, 일반 인증 등급을 부여할 수 있다. 본 연구는 인간-로봇의 상호작용을 고려한 아파트 단지의 로봇 친화형 환경 인증 모델을 세계 최초로 개발하였다는 데 의의가 있다.

A robot-friendly building certification system was established in 2022 to accommodate the growing number of service robots introduced into buildings. However, this system primarily targeted office buildings, with limitations in applying other functional architectures. To address this problem, we developed a certification model of a robot-friendly environment to extend the existing system to apartment complexes. Using focus group interviews and the analytic hierarchy process, we established 28 evaluating items categorized as (a) architecture and facility design, (b) networks and systems, (c) building operations management, and (d) support for robot activity and other services. These indicators were weighted based on their relative importance within and between categories, resulting in scores ranging from 1 to 18 points and a total of 176 points. According to evaluations with the 28 items, each apartment complex could be graded as "best," "excellent," or "general" based on its total achieved scores. This study is significant, as we present the world's first certification model of a robot-friendly environment for apartment complexes that considers human-robot interactions

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Gu, H., Hong, S. 2023. Will Regional Jobs be Replaced or Not?: The Effect of Regional Characteristics on the Likelihood of Job Replacement by Technological Progress. Journal of the Korean Geographical Society. 58(2): 135-146.
  2. Kim, S., Cheong, H., Lee, M. 2012. Evaluation on Quality of Life in Urban with Weighting Analysis by Cohort. Journal of The Korea Contents Association. 12(7): 453-462. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2012.12.07.453
  3. Kim, Y., Koo, J. 2019. Study on the Developing of Evaluation Indicators for Smart City from the Perspective of Digital Social Innovation. Journal of The Korea Contents Association. 19(10): 511-521. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2019.19.10.511
  4. Kim, C., Hwang, S., Song, Y., Kim, H. 2013. Development of an Indicator System: Suggestions from the Fertility Behavior and Environment Index Study. The Korean Association For Survey Research. 14(3): 79-114.
  5. Kim, J., Lee, J., Yoon, S. 2022. Theoretical Review for Setting the Direction of Architectural Planning in Responce to Smart Technologies. KIEAE Journal. 22(4): 55-61.
  6. Smart City Association. 2022. Notice of Application for 2022 Certification of Robot-Friendly Building.
  7. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, Korea Institute for Robot Industry Advancement, Korea Association of Robot Industry. 2022. 2021 Robot Industry Survey Results Report.
  8. Yoon, E. 2012. Analysis of the Relative Importance of Quality of Life Evaluation Factors Using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) Techniques. Korean Public Administration Review. 46(2): 395-419.
  9. Lee, K., Gu, H., Lee, Y., Jung, M., Yoon, D., Kim, K. 2022. Developing an Evaluation System for Certifying the Robot-Friendliness of Buildings through Focus Group Interviews and the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX. 52(2): 17-34.
  10. Lee, M. 2022. Robot Industry Trends and Growth Strategies. Seoul, Korea: The Export-Import Bank of Korea.
  11. Lee, T., Kim, C., So, H., Jeon, S., Kim, G., Kee, C. 2010. Indoor Surveying System Using a Pseudolite-Based Sensor Network and Pedestrian Navigation Algorithm. Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX. 40(2): 151-163.
  12. Lim, H., Kim, T. 2011. Empirical Study of Evaluating Criteria for Pedestrian Environments Utilizing Research Paper Analysis. Korean Society of Transportation. 8(6): 13-23.
  13. Jeong, W., Park, W., Cho, B. 2008. A Study on Evaluation Criteria of u-City Feasibility Using AHP. The Korea Spatial Planning Review. 56: 123-144. https://doi.org/10.15793/KSPR.2008.56..007
  14. Jeong, Y., Chae, I., Yang, I., Kim, H., Lee, H. 2013. Analysis of Relative Importance of Key Performance Indicators for Center for Child-Care Foodservice Management through Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Korean Journal of Community Nutrition. 18(2): 154-164. https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2013.18.2.154
  15. Ji, E., Son, J., Kim, M. 2015. A Study on the Development of the Social Capital Indicator that Social Workers to Recognize and Examining the Validity. Journal of Social Science. 31(1): 161-192.
  16. Statistics Korea. 2019. Results of the 3rd Amendment to the Special Classification of Robot Industry.
  17. Korea Institute For Robot Industry Advancement. 2022. Advanced Robot Regulatory Innovation Plan (Roadmap for Regulatory Innovation in the Robot Industry 2.0).
  18. Han, S., Lee, M. 2017. Analysis of Evaluation Indicator for the Development and Management of Sustainable and Resilient City: Focusing on the Goal 11 of UN Sustainable Developments Goals(SDGs). Journal of The Korean Regional Development Association. 29(3): 1-24.
  19. Hong, J. 2011. A Study on the Evaluation of Renewable Energy by Private Enterprises Using AHP Technique. Korean Energy Economic Review. 10(1): 115-142.
  20. Hwang, M. 2017. Social Workers' Professional Identities Formed in the Process of Implementing the Self-Sufficiency Program for Welfare-to-Work in Korea. Journal of Critical Social Welfare. (54): 160-208.
  21. Dolan, J. 2008. Shared Decision-Making-Transferring Research into Practice: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Patient Education and Counseling. 73(3): 418-425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.032
  22. Manyika, J., Chui, M., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Bisson, P., Marrs, A. 2013. Disruptive Technologies: Advances that Will Transform Life, Business, and the Global Economy. San Francisco, CA: McKinsey Global Institute.
  23. Ochieng, N., Wilson, K., Derrick, C., Mukherjee, N. 2018. The Use of Focus Group Discussion Methodology: Insights from Two Decades of Application in Conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 9(1): 20-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860
  24. Pauer, F., Schmidt, K., Babac, A., Damm, K., Frank, M., von der Schulenburg, J., Graf, M. 2016. Comparison of Different Approaches Applied in Analytic Hierarchy Process: An Example of Information Needs of Patients with Rare Diseases. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 16: 117.
  25. Satty, T. 1977. A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology. 15(3): 234-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
  26. The Partnership for Robotics in Europe (SPARC). 2013. Strategic Research Agenda for Robotics in 2014-2020. https://old.eu-robotics.net/sparc/upload/topic_groups/SRA2020_SPARC.pdf. Accessed May 17, 2023.
  27. Tiddi, I., Bastianelli, E., Daga, E., d'Aquin, M., Motta, E. 2020. Robot-City Interaction: Mapping the Research Landscape: A Survey of the Interactions Between Robots and Modern Cities. International Journal of Social Robotics. 12: 299-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00534-x
  28. Wrede, S., Leichsenring, C., Holthaus, P., Hermann, T., Wachsmuth, S., The CSRA Team. 2017. The Cognitive Service Robotics Apartment: A Versatile Environment for Human-Machine Interaction Research. Kunstliche Intelligenz. 31: 299-304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-017-0492-x