Changes for page Design Patterns

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
1	1	== Storyboard==
2		-We thought of 2 different story boards that we believe nicely show the intended use cases of the system. They show the different paths the system can take in an interaction and illustrate what the system can be expected to do in similar situations.
	2	+We thought of 2 different story boards that we believe nicely show the intended use cases of the system. They show the different paths the system can take in an interaction and illustrate what the system can be expected to do in similar situations. They are shown and described in detail below.
3	3
4	4	=== Scene 1===
5		-
6	6	{{html}}
7	7	<table style="width: 100%">
8	8	<tr>
...	...	@@ -11,27 +11,31 @@
11	11	</td>
12	12	<td>
13	13	The first situation we considered is the case where a person with dementia is under the impression that they are in a different period in their life and will not be convinced otherwise by the system. In the first frame, we can see the person with dementia (Gretchen) tell the robot (Pepper) that she is on her way to a lecture - which Pepper knows is not the case, as she retired before being admitted to the care home. In the second frame, Pepper attempts to convince Gretchen to stay with an argument applicable to her perceived situation. It also suggests an alternative which can be performed inside the care home, in this case solving a puzzle. Pepper would also softly start playing calm music at this point to try to get Gretchen back to reality and make her realise by herself that she is retired. However, Gretchen responds negatively to these stimuli, stating that Pepper should leave her alone and let her go about her day. Pepper in turn responds to this by trying to calm Gretchen. It does so by playing calming music associated with an activity, and explicitly suggesting that Gretchen takes part in the activity, as displayed in frame 3. Gretchen still responds negatively to this, and even becomes noticeably agitated. After this, in frame 4, Pepper recognises its intervention is not improving the situation, and it decides to ask the caretaker to help. The caretaker arrives in frame 5 and successfully takes Gretchen back to a different room.
14		-
15	15	</td>
16	16	</tr>
17	17	</table>
18	18	{{/html}}
19	19
20		-[[image:Foundation.Operational Demands.Personas@Storyboard_1.png||height="750"]]
21		-The first situation we considered is the case where a person with dementia is under the impression that they are in a different period in their life and will not be convinced otherwise by the system. In the first frame, we can see the person with dementia (Gretchen) tell the robot (Pepper) that she is on her way to a lecture - which Pepper knows is not the case, as she retired before being admitted to the care home. In the second frame, Pepper attempts to convince Gretchen to stay with an argument applicable to her perceived situation. It also suggests an alternative which can be performed inside the care home, in this case solving a puzzle. Pepper would also softly start playing calm music at this point to try to get Gretchen back to reality and make her realise by herself that she is retired. However, Gretchen responds negatively to these stimuli, stating that Pepper should leave her alone and let her go about her day. Pepper in turn responds to this by trying to calm Gretchen. It does so by playing calming music associated with an activity, and explicitly suggesting that Gretchen takes part in the activity, as displayed in frame 3. Gretchen still responds negatively to this, and even becomes noticeably agitated. After this, in frame 4, Pepper recognises its intervention is not improving the situation, and it decides to ask the caretaker to help. The caretaker arrives in frame 5 and successfully takes Gretchen back to a different room.
22		-
23		-
24	24	=== Scene 2===
25		-[[image:Foundation.Operational Demands.Personas@Storyboard_2.png||height="350"]]
	19	+{{html}}
	20	+<table style="width: 100%">
	21	+<tr>
	22	+<td style="width: 50%">
	23	+<img src="/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group05/download/Foundation/Operational%20Demands/Personas/WebHome/Storyboard_2.png?height=350&rev=1.1" />
	24	+</td>
	25	+<td>
	26	+The second situation considered is the one where the person with dementia is aware of their current situation but confused in a different way. As can be seen in the first frame of the image, the person with dementia (Robert) walks up to the robot (Pepper) convinced that it is evening and he will shortly be picked up by his family. This is, however, not the case, as it is early in the afternoon. In the second frame, Pepper decides the easiest way to convince Robert is to bring him back to reality by telling him it is not evening yet. Robert appears to be convinced but still needs an additional push, which pepper provides in the third frame. It tells Robert that it is lunch time, and accompanies this with auditory and visual signals Robert associates with lunch. As a result, Robert walks to the kitchen where a caretaker prepares lunch for him (not shown).
	27	+</td>
	28	+</tr>
	29	+</table>
	30	+{{/html}}
26	26
27		-
28		-
29	29	== TDP
30	30	|**Problem**|The caretaker of a person with dementia (PwD) might not always be around to prevent a user from going out wandering, and to locate them and bring them back if they do. To still be able to provide a safe environments for all PwD's, a humanoid robot will try to take care of such situations. This will relieve the caretakers from a number of these burdens. There might, however, be cases where the robot cannot do enough, and thus needs to alert a caretaker that can interfere.
31	31	|**Solution structure**|[[image:TDP1-improved.png||height="400"]]
32	32	|**Solution description**|In the event that a PwD wants to leave the building, the robot will interact with them. The goal of this interaction is to convince the PwD to stay inside. This can be done by asking certain questions to identify the intentions and mental state of the PwD, and responding with certain arguments or alternatives. If this is unsuccessful and the PwD goes out nonetheless, the robot will alert a caretaker of this event, transitioning from Scene A to Scene B. The caretaker will respond to this as soon as possible to prevent the PwD from going too far or getting into too many dangerous situations. The caretaker will go after the PwD, track them down and bring them back inside safely, after which the setting returns to Scene A.
33	33	|**Human RQ**|The caretaker needs to be available to respond in a relatively small amount of time and needs to be able to track down the PwD faster than they can wander.
34		-|**Robot RQ**|TODO create RQ
	37	+|**Robot RQ**|The robot needs to be able to signal the caretaker to take over at the right time (RQ007), and initiate the design pattern once the PwD nears the door (RQ001/RQ002). Other aspects are covered by the other design patterns which can be seen as concrete examples of Scene A.
35	35
36	36	== IDP1
37	37	|**Problem**|Sometimes, a person with dementia (PwD) might want to go out for a very trivial reason - for example, they might want to go to a doctor's appointment, do groceries or have coffee with the neighbours. In such cases, a rather simple counterargument might be more than enough to have these people stay inside. Alternatively, a different activity might be a reason for them to stay in as well. In such situations, the robot should be able to provide these counterarguments or activities.