Changes for page 3. Human-Robot Collaboration

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -2,12 +2,13 @@
2	2
3	3	Technology is nowadays everywhere in our life, bringing information, support and enjoyment. However, for elderly people or people with dementia, the normal modes of technology (through smartphones or laptops) are harder to access due to their decreased mental and physical capabilities. The research from [1] shows that using a social robot can improve the elderly's  interaction with technology through the intuitive human-like voice interaction with the robot. Moreover, [1] also showed that interacting with robots through song, games or other activities enhanced the PwD's positive experiences.
4	4
	5	+In the next section we will highlight key insights taken from previous research to incorporate into our design. In the last section we will introduce two formal theories that we will use to develop our robot with.
5	5
6	6	=== Lessons from previous research ===
7	7
8	8	//Adaptivity//
9	9
10		-In the research of [2], several needs and results arise through the long term trials with social robots applied in a caring home. The robots' function was mainly supportive in terms of entertainment rather than actual functional tasks. Also, the robot needs to be flexible and capable to adapt to dynamic situations in order to provide actual added value. This last insight is also supported by [3], stating that a robot needs to be able to adapt to a persons needs over time in order to not become repetitive.
	11	+In the research of [2], several needs and results arise from the long term trials with social robots in a caring home. They found that the robots' function was mainly supportive in terms of entertainment rather than actual functional tasks. Also, the robot needs to be flexible and capable to adapt to dynamic situations in order to provide actual added value. This last insight is also supported by [3], stating that a robot needs to be able to adapt to a persons needs over time in order to not become repetitive.
11	11
12	12	//Communication styles//
13	13
...	...	@@ -15,11 +15,11 @@
15	15
16	16	//Robot and caregivers//
17	17
18		-Furthermore, the researchers noted that the presence of a caregiver was key for the residents as well as for moderation of the robot, as the robot still had some technical and physical limitations. They also concluded that the human-robot interaction was best done in a group setting due to the uncertainty of the residents in dealing with the robot. In the group, the residents could learn from each other and laugh together about the robot. The key take-away from the residents: robots can enhance an activity but not replace human interaction.
	19	+Furthermore, the researchers from [4] noted that the presence of a caregiver was key for the residents as well as for moderation of the robot, as the robot still had some technical and physical limitations. They also concluded that the human-robot interaction was best done in a group setting due to the uncertainty of the residents in dealing with the robot. In the group, the residents could learn from each other and laugh together about the robot. As we are designing a robot for a one-on-one interaction, we will need to explore how the robot can not become threatening when the PwD starts getting acquainted with it.
19	19
20	20	=== Human-robot theories ===
21	21
22		-For the human-robot collaboration, we are taking into account the following theories:
	23	+For the human-robot collaboration, we wil use the following theories to design our robot with:
23	23
24	24	**Theory of mind:** Sometimes during a human-robot interaction, the PwD might misinterpret information or might be inattentive. This could lead to a communication gap between the patient and the robot. In this case, the robot will be able to detect any such issues and inform the patient without annoying the PwD  [5]
25	25