Changes for page Test

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -23,16 +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 captures different aspects of the conversation along with their mood before and after the interaction with Pepper.
	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		-For our between-subject study, our independent variable is Pepper trying to distract the users by mentioning different activities along with the corresponding music. Through this, we want to measure the effectiveness of music and activities in preventing people from leaving the care home, which is thereby our dependent variable. So we developed 2 different prototype designs-
29		-
30		-Design X - It is the full interaction flow where Pepper suggests activities and uses music to distract people from leaving.
31		-Design Y - It is the control condition where pepper simply tries to stop people from leaving by physically keeping its hand on the door.
32		-
33	33	== Participants ==
34	34
35		-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).
36	36	It is assumed that all participants are living at the same care center.
37	37	Before they start, they can choose how stubborn they want to be and where they want to go.
38	38
...	...	@@ -103,8 +103,8 @@
103	103
104	104	Pepper, laptop, door, and music.
105	105
106		-= Results =
107	107
	102	+= Results =
108	108	{{html}}
109	109	<!--=== Comparison between intelligent (cond. 1) and less intelligent (cond. 2) prototype ===
110	110
...	...	@@ -162,7 +162,6 @@
162	162	{{/html}}
163	163
164	164	=== RQ1: Are people convinced not to go out unsupervised? ===
165		-
166	166	{{html}}
167	167	<table style="width: 100%">
168	168	<tr>
...	...	@@ -177,7 +177,6 @@
177	177	{{/html}}
178	178
179	179	=== RQ2: How does the interaction change the participant's mood? ===
180		-
181	181	{{html}}
182	182	<table style="width: 100%">
183	183	<tr>
...	...	@@ -192,7 +192,6 @@
192	192	{{/html}}
193	193
194	194	=== RQ3: Can the robot respond appropriately to the participant's intention? ===
195		-
196	196	{{html}}
197	197	<table style="width: 100%">
198	198	<tr>
...	...	@@ -207,7 +207,6 @@
207	207	{{/html}}
208	208
209	209	=== RQ4: How do the participants react to the music? ===
210		-
211	211	{{html}}
212	212	<table style="width: 100%">
213	213	<tr>
...	...	@@ -222,7 +222,6 @@
222	222	{{/html}}
223	223
224	224	=== RQ5: Does the activity that the robot suggests prevent people from wandering/ leaving? ===
225		-
226	226	{{html}}
227	227	<table style="width: 100%">
228	228	<tr>
...	...	@@ -237,7 +237,6 @@
237	237	{{/html}}
238	238
239	239	=== RQ6: Can pepper identify and catch the attention of the PwD? ===
240		-
241	241	{{html}}
242	242	<table style="width: 100%">
243	243	<tr>
...	...	@@ -252,7 +252,6 @@
252	252	{{/html}}
253	253
254	254	=== Reliabity Scores ===
255		-
256	256	{{html}}
257	257	<table style="width: 100%">
258	258	<tr>
...	...	@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@
266	266	</table>
267	267	{{/html}}
268	268
269		-= Limitation =
	257	+= Limitation=
270	270
271	271	* **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.
272	272
...	...	@@ -277,7 +277,6 @@
277	277	* **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.
278	278
279	279	= Conclusions =
280		-
281	281	* People who liked the activity tend to stay in
282	282	* People who knew the music found it more fitting
283	283	* People are more convinced to stay in with the intelligent prototype
...	...	@@ -286,8 +286,8 @@
286	286	* Experiment with personalization
287	287
288	288	= Future Work =
289		-
290	290	* **Personalisation**: Personalize music, and activity preferences according to the person interacting with Pepper.
291	291	* **Robot Collaboration**: Collaborate with other robots such as Miro to assist a person with dementia while going for a walk instead of the caretaker.
292	292	* **Recognise Person**: For a personalised experience, it is essential that Pepper is able to identify each person based on an internal database.
293	293	* **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	+