Changes for page Pierre Bongrand

Summary

• Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -7,77 +7,143 @@
7	7	Since the goal of this project is to develop a prototype that meets a real life need. The field of knowledge is very wide ranging from the types of dementia, and the needs of these people, to the type of activities they want to engage in, to the technologies available to help them.
8	8	We decided to divide each of these tasks among the six group members. The idea being that each person will do in-depth research in one of the areas and can present it to the group for the weekend. This way the whole group will be proficient on the topic as a whole.
9	9
	10	+**Research**
	11	+
10	10	I chose to work on two aspects:
11		-**Location of PwD:**
	13	+__Location of PwD:__
12	12	I have listed the advantages, disadvantages and specificities of two settings: health care center, and the patient's home.
13	13
14		-**Interaction Goals:**
	16	+__Interaction Goals:__
15	15	I researched the needs of people with dementia. I identified three types of goals the chosen robot could fulfil: functional, emotional, and safety.
16	16	I listed 5 to 10 potential use cases per goal that I found to be either the most important or very original and not already fulfil.
17	17
18	18	Finally, I presented this work to the team and we all made choices about: the type of dementia the patient would have, the potential goals and use cases we will focus on, the type of robot to chose.
19	19
	22	+**Report**
	23	+
20	20	Based on my work, we wrote with Sneha and Haoran a first version of: the environment, the stakeholders, the problem scenario, the objectives. We also defined a first use case.
21	21
22	22
23	23	==== Week 2====
	28	+
24	24	We splitted the team in two subteams. Sneha and I would work on the report while the rest of the group would work on the code.
25	25	The point of this was that we could both get an idea on how to code our technical solution and define our problem scenario and personas.
26		-Sneha and I decided based on a series of argument and by the willingness of the group to implement a solution based on communication that the project will be oriented for patient with early stage and mild dementia.
	31	+Sneha and I decided based on a series of argument and by the willingness of the group to implement a solution based on communication that the project will be oriented for patient with early stage and mild dementia.
27	27
28		-Sneha and I defined based on this decision three personas:
29		-- Annabelle a 36 years old women with early stage of vascular dementia.
30		-- Charles a 80 years old man with mild dementia.
31		-- Lucy a healthcare person.
	33	+Sneha and I defined based on this worked on the report.
32	32
33		-We made some notes about it and only wrote it in the xWiki the beginning of the following week.
	35	+**Report & Design**
34	34
35		-We improved the report by editing the following sections:
36		-- Objectives. We modified our objectives and categorised them in two categories: Increase the life span and Improve quality of life.
37		--
	37	+- Defining the personas
	38	+We improved the report by writing a first version of the following sections:
	39	+- Objectives
	40	+- Claims
	41	+- Environment
	42	+- Stakeholders
	43	+
38	38	==== Week 3====
39		-Even though we wanted to switch roles week by week so that everyone would be proficient both with the code and the report we didn't as we accumulated a bit of work from the previous week in both subteams. As a result, I worked with Sneha this week on the report and the general goals of the robot.
40	40
41		-We mainly worked on the use cases which was a considerable load of work.
42		-As the "technical" subteam gave us some feedback on what was feasible, Sneha and I precised the feasible objectives and came up with 4 different use cases.
43		-We defined these use cases,
	46	+Even though we wanted to switch roles week by week so that everyone would be proficient both with the code and the report we didn't as we accumulated a bit of work from the previous week in both subteams. As a result, I worked with Sneha this week on the report and explored the general potential goals of the robot.
44	44
	48	+**Report & Design**
45	45
	50	+- We defined the use cases and described the steps sequence of each one of them.
	51	+- We redefined our goals according to the limitations of Pepper.
	52	+- We defined a first series of requirements.
	53	+
46	46	==== Week 4====
47		-- Design Patterns
48		-- Ontology
49		-- Specification->Functions.
50	50
51		-Requirement
	56	+**Report with Sneha**
52	52
53		-==== Week 5====
54		-PRESENTATION:
55		--
56		-REPORT:
57		-- Claims
	58	+- Designed the team design patterns and drew it.
	59	+- Ontology. Designed the ontology. Sneha drew it.
58	58	- Requirements
59		-- Objectives
60		-- Music Management
	61	+- Analysed other group's work report and made minor edits to few sections.
61	61
62		-I also provided some feedback about the evaluation. The evaluation was first in an ideal setup, and after
63	63
	64	+==== Week 5====
64	64
	66	+**Report**
65	65
	68	+- Defined the claims.
	69	+- Redefined most of the requirements and described all the features.
	70	+- Redefined the Use cases according to the new claims and requirements.
	71	+- Reorganised the objectives and made minor edits.
	72	+- Wrote a first version of the Music Management page.
	73	+- Provided some feedback about the evaluation and gave some input about the evaluation process.
	74	+
	75	+**Presentation**
	76	+
	77	+This week as Pietro was contact case one day before the presentation, I had to replace him for the presentation.
	78	+- Make every slides that I presented (as nothing was ready before).
	79	+- Write the text of my presentation (as nothing was ready before).
	80	+- Give feedback about the slides of other speakers
	81	+- Presented
	82	+
66	66	==== Week 6====
67		-As many deadlines are approaching at the end of the block and the deliverables for this projects needs to be finished soon, I took a bit of managerial position.
68	68
	85	+As many deadlines are approaching at the end of the block and the deliverables for this project needs to be finished soon, I took a bit of managerial position. Moreover, as some people didn't participate much in the project until now. I kindly asked in the group chat and in person, that it would be nice if everyone could contribute as much as everyone else. As some people had very little idea about the specifications of our project a part of my work this week was to guide them and help them get on track so that they could contribute later on.
69	69
	87	+**Managing**
	88	+
	89	+- Made a list of tasks accessible and editable online. The list was organised by both priority (not done, needs to be improved, fine but could be improved, done) and type (report, code, presentation). The idea of the list would be that everyone could access anytime the list of remaining things to work on, and could be updated by anyone.
	90	+- Asked tasks preferences of each team members.
	91	+- Provided description to each task.
	92	+- Helped individually three people to get on track with the project.
	93	+- Reminded people to complete their part. Otherwise, we would not meet the deliverable deadline.
	94	+- Gave regularly feedback about the report on XWiki.
	95	+
	96	+**Report**
	97	+- Wrote the a first version of the inclusive design page.
	98	+- Implemented the feedback from the presentation about the team design patterns
	99	+
70	70	==== Week 7====
71		-- Ontology
72		-- Design pattern
73	73
	102	+**Managing**
74	74
75	75
	105	+**Report**
	106	+
	107	+- Wrote the a first version of the Human-Agent Teamwork page.
	108	+- Implemented feedback that we received from the professors on roughly every tab of the wiki: Foundation, Specification, Evaluation, Design Pattern.
	109	+- Contacted Bart to add some new pages and feature to the Xwiki.
	110	+
	111	+__With Sneha:__
	112	+- Use cases: We corrected some mapping error between UC step, Requirement and Claims.
	113	+- Team Design Pattern: Modified the visuals to make it work with the IDP.
	114	+- Claims: We updated the claims according to the feedback provided by the professors and made the appropriate changes to the use cases, so that it matches well
	115	+- Requirements: We updated the claims according to the feedback provided by the professors
	116	+
	117	+
	118	+**Experiments**
	119	+
	120	+- Gave extensive repeated feedback about the questionnaire, its style and experiment process.
	121	+- Mathieu and I corrected the evaluation forms as there were some mistakes.
	122	+- Did 15 evaluation sessions on Monday, Thursday and Friday.
	123	+- Participated in 3 experiments of other groups.
	124	+
76	76	==== Week 8====
77	77
	127	+**Managing**
78	78
79	79
80	80
	131	+**Report**
81	81
	133	+- Created, designed, wrote the Graphical User Interface section and visuals. As it was some feedback from the professors from our presentation, I thought it would be a nice addition to describe the work we have done concerning the GUI.
	134	+- Humanoid Robot: As some feedback given on this page by group members has not been implemented in more than 2 weeks, I took the liberty to completely rework this section.
	135	+- Implemented the feedback of the professors about the Ontology based on some literature.
	136	+- Adjusted the Introduction.
	137	+- Added citations to the pages that needed sourcing (Including research).
	138	+- Made some analysis about the data we collected for our results.
	139	+- Explored different visuals for displaying the results
	140	+- Proof-read the entire report iteratively as we improved sections repeatedly.
	141	+- Gave some constructive feedback about 90% of the sections on the Xwiki or by group messages.
	142	+- Analysed other group's work report and made minor edits to few sections about aesthetics and structure.
	143	+- Contacted Bart to add some new pages and feature to the Xwiki.
	144	+- Improved and adapted the general aesthetic of the pages to the export features of XWiki (because export feature changes the nature of the webpages).
	145	+
82	82	== Personal Reflections==
	147	+In general I really enjoyed working on this project. I found the lectures to be really interesting. The guest lecturers were really a nice addition and gave some very valuable insights. The iterative process of the project was a great pedagogical experience. Moreover, contributing in a practical way to a societal problem felt very nice and gave me some perspective about how I will use my knowledge after this degree.
83	83
	149	+On another note, a significative downside of this project was the severe lack of motivation of a few team members. Even though help and reminders were provided to unmotivated individuals, it had very little effect on them. This results in a very unfair repartition of work as half of the team overworked as we were passionated by the project and wanted to deliver a nice and finished product.