Changes for page Humanoid Robot

Summary

• Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Author

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-XWiki.PierreBongrand
	1	+XWiki.snehalodha

Content

...	...	@@ -1,9 +1,7 @@
1	1	= Robot Choice =
2		-For this project on dementia, we chose to make use of a semi-humanoid robot namely [[Pepper>>https://www.softbankrobotics.com/emea/en/pepper]].
	2	+We were offered to work with three robots: [[Pepper>>https://www.softbankrobotics.com/emea/en/pepper]], [[Nao>>https://www.softbankrobotics.com/emea/en/nao]] and [[Miro>>https://www.miro-e.com]].
	3	+As our main goal is to improve the quality of life of the patient with dementia by providing some some social support. We believe that the human size semi-humanoid form of Pepper and its capacity to communicate easily with humans are great comparative advantages to choose it.
3	3
4		--> Need to find/write reasons
5		-
6		-
7	7	= Pepper Description =
8	8	Pepper is a robot that allows easy communication robot/user, thanks to its ability kit that includes:
9	9	* Speech recognition
...	...	@@ -12,8 +12,8 @@
12	12	* Cameras
13	13	* Humanoid form
14	14
15		-The image below refers all the robot sensors.
16	16	[[image:Pepper-robot-sensors-18.jpg]]
	14	+Figure 1: All sensors and actuators provided by Pepper
17	17
18	18	= Pepper usage =
19	19	We tried to make full use of the sensors provided within Pepper. As we had limited amount of time we mainly focused on working with: the microphones, the speakers, the display and the arms movement of Pepper.
...	...	@@ -28,22 +28,22 @@
28	28	For the actual implemented version, we have enabled Pepper to show images about the current activity when interacting with the PwDs, which can not only improve the efficiency of communication between them, but also makes PwDs feel more cared.
29	29
30	30	= Iterative Process =
31		--> Describe a bit a philosophy from slides: SCE framework & PACT analysis.
	29	+Through the course of the development of Pepper, we followed an iterative process of design where we programmed and re-programmed certain aspects to accommodate weekly feedback. This approach aided us in ameliorating existing functionality, while adding new features. The following is brief indication of how this iterative process looked for our development pipeline:
	30	+1. Research overview of how Pepper works, and look into the interactive robotics platform and Choregraphe
	31	+2. Use the virtual version of Pepper on Choregraphe to make some initial behaviors (based off usecases)
	32	+3. Review implemented behaviors using physical version of Pepper
	33	+4. Make some adjustments and debug according to observed behaviors of previous iteration
	34	+5. Add new behaviors and test once again with physical version of Pepper
	35	+6. Test and improve the final behaviors!
32	32
33	33	== PACT analysis ==
34	34	->need to add a bit of text
35	35	**People** perform **activities** in specific **contexts** with **technologies**, which affect the situated activities, which set new user requirements.
36		-based on:
37	37
38	38	Using this method leads to a cyclic process of progression as can be seen on the image [1] below presented during the lecture.
39	39
40	40	[[image:PACT.png||width="700" height="576"]]
41	41
42		-
43		-
44		-
45		-
46		-
47	47	Moreover, using [[Choregraphe>>http://doc.aldebaran.com/2-4/software/choregraphe/choregraphe_overview.html]], Pepper is highly parameterizable, it is relatively easy to expand the functionalities by programming new blocks, and prototypes can also be done quickly. This is very valuable as we expanded every week our prototype to include new features based on the content from the lecture.
48	48
49	49