Skip to Content

Changes for page Test

Last modified by Clara Stiller on 2022/04/05 13:44
From version Icon 59.1 Icon
edited by Vishruty Mittal
on 2022/04/02 11:51
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version Icon 57.1 Icon
edited by Vishruty Mittal
on 2022/04/02 11:46
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Icon Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -23,11 +23,11 @@
23 23  
24 24  = Method =
25 25  
26 -A between-subject study with students who play the role of having dementia. Data will be collected with a questionnaire that participants fill out before and after interacting with Pepper. The questionnaire captured different aspects of their conversation.
26 +A between-subject study with students who play the role of having dementia. Data will be collected with a questionnaire (before and after participation), observing the participant's body language and the way that they're responding to Pepper.
27 27  
28 28  == Participants ==
29 29  
30 -17 students who play the role of having dementia. They will be divided into two groups. One group (11 participants) will be interacting with the intelligent (group 1) robot while the other group (6 students) will interact with the unintelligent robot (group 2).
30 +18 students who play the role of having dementia. They will be divided into two groups. One group (11 participants) will be interacting with the intelligent (group 1) robot while the other group (7 students) will interact with the unintelligent robot (group 2).
31 31  It is assumed that all participants are living at the same care center.
32 32  Before they start, they can choose how stubborn they want to be and where they want to go.
33 33  
... ... @@ -98,8 +98,8 @@
98 98  
99 99  Pepper, laptop, door, and music.
100 100  
101 -= Results =
102 102  
102 += Results =
103 103  {{html}}
104 104  <!--=== Comparison between intelligent (cond. 1) and less intelligent (cond. 2) prototype ===
105 105  
... ... @@ -157,7 +157,6 @@
157 157  {{/html}}
158 158  
159 159  === RQ1: Are people convinced not to go out unsupervised? ===
160 -
161 161  {{html}}
162 162  <table style="width: 100%">
163 163  <tr>
... ... @@ -172,7 +172,6 @@
172 172  {{/html}}
173 173  
174 174  === RQ2: How does the interaction change the participant's mood? ===
175 -
176 176  {{html}}
177 177  <table style="width: 100%">
178 178  <tr>
... ... @@ -187,7 +187,6 @@
187 187  {{/html}}
188 188  
189 189  === RQ3: Can the robot respond appropriately to the participant's intention? ===
190 -
191 191  {{html}}
192 192  <table style="width: 100%">
193 193  <tr>
... ... @@ -202,7 +202,6 @@
202 202  {{/html}}
203 203  
204 204  === RQ4: How do the participants react to the music? ===
205 -
206 206  {{html}}
207 207  <table style="width: 100%">
208 208  <tr>
... ... @@ -217,7 +217,6 @@
217 217  {{/html}}
218 218  
219 219  === RQ5: Does the activity that the robot suggests prevent people from wandering/ leaving? ===
220 -
221 221  {{html}}
222 222  <table style="width: 100%">
223 223  <tr>
... ... @@ -232,7 +232,6 @@
232 232  {{/html}}
233 233  
234 234  === RQ6: Can pepper identify and catch the attention of the PwD? ===
235 -
236 236  {{html}}
237 237  <table style="width: 100%">
238 238  <tr>
... ... @@ -247,7 +247,6 @@
247 247  {{/html}}
248 248  
249 249  === Reliabity Scores ===
250 -
251 251  {{html}}
252 252  <table style="width: 100%">
253 253  <tr>
... ... @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
261 261  </table>
262 262  {{/html}}
263 263  
264 -= Limitation =
257 += Limitation=
265 265  
266 266  * **Lab Environment**: The lab environment is different from a care home, the participants found it difficult to process the suggestions made by Pepper. For example, if Pepper asked someone to visit the living room, it created confusion among the participants regarding their next action.
267 267  
... ... @@ -272,7 +272,6 @@
272 272  * **Face Detection**: The face recognition module within Pepper is also rudimentary in nature. It can not detect half faces are when participants approach from the side. Adding to the problem, the lighting condition in the lab was not sufficient for the reliable functioning of the face recognition module. Hence Pepper failed to notice the participant in some cases and did not start the dialogue flow.
273 273  
274 274  = Conclusions =
275 -
276 276  * People who liked the activity tend to stay in
277 277  * People who knew the music found it more fitting
278 278  * People are more convinced to stay in with the intelligent prototype
... ... @@ -281,8 +281,8 @@
281 281  * Experiment with personalization
282 282  
283 283  = Future Work =
284 -
285 285  * **Personalisation**: Personalize music, and activity preferences according to the person interacting with Pepper.
286 286  * **Robot Collaboration**: Collaborate with other robots such as Miro to assist a person with dementia while going for a walk instead of the caretaker.
287 287  * **Recognise Person**: For a personalised experience, it is essential that Pepper is able to identify each person based on an internal database.
288 288  * **Fine Tune Speech Recognition**: Improvements are necessary for the speech recognition module before the actual deployment of the project in a care home. Additionally, support for multiple languages can be considered to engage with non-English speaking people.
280 +