PRE2018 3 Group7: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
'''Secondary users''' | '''Secondary users''' | ||
The secondary users are the care givers and family of the old people. The family and friends might feel less anxious about the physical health of the elderly person they care for, | The secondary users are the care givers and the family and friends of the old people. The family and friends might feel less anxious about the physical health of the elderly person they care for, when they know that they are performing regular exercises in a appropriate way. One functionality that can be added for example is the option to check on the robot, whether the elderly has actually performed the exercises and how well they did. This way they will be able to keep track of their activity and see if progress has been made. The functionality of tracking progress can also be useful for the caregivers hence they can see how certain physical exercises are affecting their patient and if maybe some exercises have to be changed or added. | ||
== State-of-the-art == | == State-of-the-art == | ||
Revision as of 17:37, 8 February 2019
Group members
| Name | Student ID | Major |
|---|---|---|
| Jules Vliem | 1256122 | Electrical Engineering |
| Stijn Verhoeven | 1238464 | Mechanical Engineering |
| Tim Jonkman | 0963139 | Mechanical Engineering |
| Ruben Schmeitz | 1233052 | Mechanical Engineering |
| Jessie Maassen | 1266500 | Computer Science |
Introduction
As the amount of elderly increases, the
Problem Statement
Week 1
Subject
Objectives
Users
Primary users
The primary users of our technology are elderly people. Our technology is aimed at improving the physical health of elderly people, while providing them with the comfort of their own homes. Elderly people however are often characterised as being skeptical about technology. That's why it's important to focus on how this feedback technology can be integrated in the households of the elderly people effectively, so no aversion towards it is provoked. Firstly it has been shown that people tend to react better to commands and feedback given by real robots than virtual agents.[1] That's why it is important that we don't just make a virtual platform that can check the physical movements of the elderly people and give feedback to it, but that its functionality is combined with a physical robot. Another thing the elderly people require in order to improve their physical activity by given feedback is the way the technology communicates with the person. The
Secondary users
The secondary users are the care givers and the family and friends of the old people. The family and friends might feel less anxious about the physical health of the elderly person they care for, when they know that they are performing regular exercises in a appropriate way. One functionality that can be added for example is the option to check on the robot, whether the elderly has actually performed the exercises and how well they did. This way they will be able to keep track of their activity and see if progress has been made. The functionality of tracking progress can also be useful for the caregivers hence they can see how certain physical exercises are affecting their patient and if maybe some exercises have to be changed or added.
State-of-the-art
For the use of care robots as exercise coach different kinds of research have been done. Different methods on how the robot should interact with people have been tested. For example the difference between relational and non-relational robot, where the relational one was preferred over the other [2]. Or that socially assistive robots positively affect motivation compared to smart environment interfaces such as touch screens [3]. But mostly research about the ethical consequences of the use of care robots for elderly people have been done [4]
But for how to check if the elders do their tasks, not a lot of studies have been done
Approach
Planning
Milestones
Deliverables
Who will do what
Problem statement + objectives - Tim
State of the art - Jules + Stijn
Users + What do they require - Jessie
Approach, milestones and deliverables + who does what - Ruben
References
- ↑ [Bainbridge, W. A., Hart, J, Kim, E. S. & Scassellati, B. (2008). Theeffect of presence on human-robot interaction. In:The 17th IEEEInternational Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 701–706.]
- ↑ J. Fasola and M. J. Mataric, "Using Socially Assistive Human–Robot Interaction to Motivate Physical Exercise for Older Adults," in Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 100, no. 8, pp. 2512-2526, Aug. 2012. [1]
- ↑ Torta, Elena & Oberzaucher, Johannes & Werner, Franz & Cuijpers, Raymond & Juola, James. (2013). Attitudes Towards Socially Assistive Robots in Intelligent Homes: Results From Laboratory Studies and Field Trials. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction. 1. 76-99. [2]
- ↑ Bernd Carsten Stahl, Neil McBride, Kutoma Wakunuma, Catherine Flick, The empathic care robot: A prototype of responsible research and innovation, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume 84, 2014, Pages 74-85. [3]
Y. Matsusaka, H. Fujii, T. Okano and I. Hara, "Health exercise demonstration robot TAIZO and effects of using voice command in robot-human collaborative demonstration," RO-MAN 2009 - The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Toyama, 2009, pp. 472-477. [4]
An autonomous robotic exercise tutor for elderly people %is een goede%