Skip to Content

Changes for page Robotic Partner

Last modified by Andrei Stefan on 2022/04/04 12:11
From version Icon 6.1 Icon
edited by Andrei Stefan
on 2022/02/15 11:49
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version Icon 6.2 Icon
edited by Andrei Stefan
on 2022/02/15 11:55
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Icon Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
1 1  ====Choice of robotic partner====
2 2  
3 - Therefore, robots such as Pepper, who has an in-built display or NAO, who can interact with a tablet, are considered more suitable than Miro.
3 +We want the robots to be able to interact with the users through more than just music, so robots such as Pepper, who has an in-built display or NAO, who can interact with a tablet, are considered more suitable than Miro. Furthermore, it might feel unnatural to hear an animal-shaped robot play music rather than animal sounds. A smaller robot, such as NAO, is more suitable when users live (more or less) independently, as it can be moved where it needs to be, does not take up a lot of space, and is also easier to take on walks. Furthermore, if the user regularly wisits care homes, they can take the robot with them without too much trouble.
4 4  
5 -
6 6  ===Goals===
7 7  
8 8  The goals of the robotic partner are strongly correlated with the Problem Scenarios and the Use Cases.
... ... @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
9 9  
10 10  ==== Daily routines====
11 11  
12 -The main goal of the robotic partner is to help users maintain their daily routines. Towards this end, the robot should be able to display a list of tasks and should also help the users remember to do them.
11 +The main goal of the robotic partner is to help users maintain their daily routines. Towards this end, the robot should be able to display a list of tasks and should also help the users remember to do them. Therefore, the robot should have access to a tablet which can show the list when needed.
13 13  
14 14  ====Reducing memory deterioration====
15 15