PRE2019 4 Group5

From Control Systems Technology Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Group members

Name Student number Study
Danielle Paige Gillam 1227637 Psychology & Technology (ICT)
Lucia Kalkman 1335529 Electrical Engineering
Annemijn Cissy van der Lande 1239822 Psychology & Technology (Robotics)
Dajt Mullaj 1286722 Computer Science
Fabiènne Pascalle van der Weide 1004980 Psychology & Technology (ICT)

Introduction

Nowadays, more and more automated technology in the vehicles industry is making its entrance in society. With the current situation of COVID-19, people are forced to live in social distancing societies [1], which results for some social groups in major challenges to continue living in a normal and healthy way. One of the major issues society is facing is maintaining the health of people who have to stay home, but still need to receive their medicines. Delivery robots could give an outcome in this situation and might give perspectives for after the COVID-19 influenced society. [2] These robots are already in use, in several situations, environments and forms. Furthermore, they are currently experimenting with these delivery robots for multiple purposes.[3]

Problem Statement

This project will explore how to implement a system of autonomous robots for the delivery of medicine and goods to the elderly and sick people. The system could then be used in hospitals to help the staff with intensive care units and for deliveries from pharmacies directly to houses or elderly homes. To sustain an efficient delivery scheme the project will develop a prototype for a multi compartment robot. Each compartment will contain medicine for a specific delivery, so that in a single trip the robot will visit multiple houses or contain all the drugs for each elder of an elderly home. The prototype will therefore be composed of two main parts, each solving a main problem of implementing delivery robots for medicines. The first part will be a software demonstrating the navigation system of a robot that needs to visit multiple houses before coming back to the pharmacy for the next delivery. The software will be written in NetLogo, a programming language and IDE for modeling agent-based environments. The second part of the prototype will consist in demonstrating the robot’s multi compartment system. To do that an app, written in Swift, will be developed and hardware representing a robot with more compartments will be assembled. The app will have an option to log in as a user or as a pharmacist/caretaker. The robot will have levers mimicking compartments opening or closing and a board to take inputs. As a user you will be able to order medicine through the app, which in turn will display a password to type on the robot’s board. When such action is performed the correct compartment containing the requested medicine will open. The project, moreover, takes into consideration that smartphones are not popular with the elderly. Therefore the latter or the caretaker assigned to an arbitrary elderly home can enter in contact with a pharmacist either by physically going to the pharmacy or by digital means, like with an email, and create a subscription for a delivery plan. They will then receive from the pharmacist a password, and on each delivery the pharmacist will furnish the robot and logging in the app will set the password for the specific compartment to the one agreed upon when the subscription was initiated. The project, as specified before, could also be used to perform deliveries within the hospital's ground in order to prevent the spread of infectious diseases among the healthcare staff.

Objectives

  • Research the state of the art of the current autonomous delivery robots.
  • Understand the requirements for delivery robots in the medical field.
  • Design and implement a navigation system for autonomous delivery robots that finds the shortest path across multiple targets.
  • Design and implement a multi compartment system that can lock each compartment by means of a password and communicates with an external application to set said passwords.
  • Test both systems to understand their limitations and improve their functionalities.

State of the Art

Delivery robots (for medicine)

The types of robot forms that are currently under study and first use, can be subdivided into two areas: vehicles at the ground and in the air. The great advantage of using air-based delivery robots, like drones, is the reduced amount of interaction. However, traffic regulations are currently undefined. For the ground-based vehicles, both aspects named before are the opposite in here.


Another distinction that can be made, is the environment in which the delivery robot will perform. Currently, there are view hospitals in which robots are used to transport medicines to the patients. This is an example of inside transportation, minimizing path planning and the amount of traffic, but maximizing its demand for room recognition. [4] Also one aptheker has used delivery robots as an experiment by transporting the medicines to care-units where nurses took over the packages. The overall attitude towards this user experience was fine, but is influenced by the fact that both stakeholders had to minimally interact and were not involved in the technical liability issue. This is an example in the field of an outside environment where the robots had to face a lot of traffic and path planning, but less on room-recognition, since it delivered a package to one care unit. [5]


Furthermore, the purpose of transport can vary a lot. At the moment, drones and ground vehicles are mostly transporting goods like food and medicines, both giving an outcome for people who have transport difficulties or are not able to go outside because of their health. In Wuhan for example, the delivery robots are both already in experimenting use. [2] For food, real-time and path planning are really important. Another important aspect is its capacity of carrying a large amount of goods. It is therefore more common that riding vehicles carry these goods, whereas medicines are in smaller amounts but are more often carried by drones due to safety reasons. [6] Time plays a role in this as well, for instance: warm food needs to be delivered fast and vital donor organs need to be brought fast in war areas. [7] We can conclude that the goal of the service provided can therefore play an important role in the design choices.


Lastly, the types of technique can be distinguished, since this varies a lot per delivery robot. We will discuss this by looking at path planning, coördination & recognition, mechanics and AI in general.

Path planning/scheduling

Finding a feasible route of movement can be challenging for autonomous vehicles. Multiple algorithms are therefore proposed to improve its efficiency and safety on their path. These algorithms differ for robots that are returning or non-returning [8]. Also the use of GPS systems is a common tool in scheduling. Furthermore, a newer tool has been designed by making use of pedestrian flow, in which it adapts to the pedestrian potential equation based on the route estimation model [9]. When making a path planning outside, often a SLAM system is used, helping the robot to deal with the huge maps of city centers. It provides a large map of the surrounding environment [10]. This system takes the type of roads into account, traversability and provides a method for localization in dynamic environments [11]. Lastly, there are also central systems already that can map where all other robots are currently located, to generate as a pick up / order system, solving many problems in the communication between robots implementation on a larger scale [12].

Coördination & object recognition

A method for coordination is iGPS, this is working with ceiling cameras [13]. Another commonly used technique combination for coördination and object recognition is making use of artificial intelligence, ultrasonic sensors and cameras [14]. An example of this is the FedEx SameDay Bot — which looks like a cooler on wheels — is designed to travel on sidewalks and along roadsides to deliver small orders to homes and businesses [15]. This type of robot successfully passes objects on their way, like trash cans, skateboards etc. Moreover, another example is Amazon Scout devices; also using cameras and sensors for its planning and cöordination [16]. Furthermore, there are also robots that are capable of recognizing and distinguishing between rooms [17], making use of intelligent machine vision [18].

Mechanics

First of all, when looking at the ground vehicles, they have to face several problems on the road, so good mechanics are essential. At the moment, a wheel and track hybrid robot platform exists which is highly applicable to various urban environments. The developed robot platform has all advantages of track and wheel. Furthermore, this hybrid concept is highly energy-efficient because of its less-friction using wheels only on navigating flatland [19]. Moreover, new developments in the technologies of drone delivery are aircraft design, battery improvements, and control software. They could transform this industry and, consequently, society as a whole [7].


Finally, we should not forget to look at the current attitude people have towards this upcoming innovation. This is dependent on the perspective we look at. Current studies show this broadly, by making a distinction in the type of stakeholder. Random people in traffic for example will have different attitudes towards the robot than the receivers of the good [20]. Also the environmental footprint raises discussions: drones are a relatively sustainable transportation method, but the production is not. [21] However, one thing that is universal is that the delivery robot should be in balance with safety, ease of use, environment, goal and efficiency. Dependent on the welfare of the society, attitudes towards robots might differ. [20]

Limitations and issues

There are multiple problems before autonomous delivery robots can be fully used. In the following part the major issues will be stated that are currently holding back the implementation of delivery robots. One of the main problems is the attitude of society about automated vehicles. There are concerns about the safety of the transport, such things as hacking could cause problems. However, there are other concerns people have. For example whether more people will get unemployed when delivery robots are widely spread. People are also wondering whether a robot can reach every location, climbing stairs or entering a building could be difficult.[22] People also think that for example a sidewalk robot should not hinder pedestrians, which causes even more things to take care of when designing the robot. [6]

Another problem are all the technical issues. Is it possible for a robot to reach a higher efficiency, improve time and reduce cost and energy consumption. Will a robot be as reliable as a human? It should be able to deliver something within the same time and guarantee that the product arrives. [23] The biggest technical issue is the navigation and the interaction with the environment. This means the robot should always know where it is and where it’s goal is, but also what happens around him. What are possible dangers and what is the best possible way to get where it should be. Especially with a lot of individuals who don’t follow the same paths it can be difficult for a sidewalk robot to avoid them all. [9] The current technology is still struggling with this.

The final issues are the regulations. For UAV’s there are special regulations, and they are not allowed to fly everywhere, however, self-driving cars counter the same issues. They are not allowed on the road because of many ethical issues and some technical liabilities. The last option are sidewalk robots, which don’t have to meet as many regulations, but they are also difficult because pedestrians are hard to model and follow less strict paths.[24] All the different regulations in different countries and all the parts that are still very vague make it difficult to really develop delivery robots. Also questions like who is responsible for the robots mistakes make it less attractive to start working on delivery robots.[25]

Stakeholders

There are a number of different stakeholders when it comes to the field of medical delivery robots. Here the main stakeholders within the scopes of users, society and enterprise will be presented and discussed.

USE perspectives

Users

The primary users of medical delivery robots are those who directly interact with the robot. Therefore sick or elderly people who require medicine deliveries will fall into this category. These patients will have to have sufficient understanding of how to interact with the robots and respective applications. Pharmacists and nurses will also be considered primary users as they will have to interact with the robot in order to fill it with sufficient supplies for respective patients and understand the operation of the application and robot. These users will be considered the most in the design process as they will use the robot for it's purpose, and so interface design choices as well as technical design choices will be made in order to best accommodate these users.

Society

Within society there are a number of stakeholders, the first being the Government. The Government are responsible for laws and regulations regarding the medical delivery robots, this includes traffic regulations as well as ethical laws.

The second stakeholder that is a part of the societal perspective is nurses caretakers and doctors. As well as being direct users of the robots in terms of stocking them with medicine, the medical delivery robots impact them in a less direct manner too. For example in the midst of a pandemic or an outbreak of disease, the fact that these health care workers are able to send a delivery robot to infected patients means that they reduce the risk of being infected themselves. Hospitals themselves are also stakeholders and due to the fact that hospitals are commonly hotspots for these outbreaks the reduction of infection of their staff will help prevent understaffing. The reduction of the spread of disease will additionally help society as a whole as well as reducing stress on governments.

The final societal stakeholders are people who encounter the medical delivery robots on the streets while they are performing their delivery or pick-up tasks. These individuals play an important role in the fabrication of laws and regulations as their lives will be affected by the robots without any direct gain from them. For example the possibility of disruption in pedestrian traffic or even the vandalisation of the robots will motivate respective regulations. In order to gain this stakeholder perspective a survey will be performed in order to gain insight from these stakeholders and their attitudes towards delivery robots.

Enterprise

Within the scope of Enterprise the main stakeholders are the technical companies which are developing the medical delivery robots as well as the hospitals and pharmacies with which they are partnered.

Requirement analysis

User interviews

To identify current problems and requirements of the medicine delivery robot, interviews with potential users were conducted. Interviews with the primary users (elderly), as well as pharmacists, and caretakers took place. The questions used for these interviews and the transciptions can be found here. Below, the main findings and conclusions regarding the most important features are summarized.

Practical

  • Should be user friendly and understandable
  • Delivery time should be known / tracked/ communicated / the same every time
  • Routes and times should be calculated efficiently
  • Notify user when arrived at location
  • Cooled compartments
  • Clear labels / sachets so medicine don't get swapped
  • QR codes or notifications and tips through an application to give extra information
  • Feedback from customers should be implemented
  • Option to offer counselling (could be implemented through a chat function)

Safety

  • Decide who is allowed to use this service / who should decide this?
  • (In care home) way to monitor if people correctly take their meds
  • A lock system that identifies the user (password/code/app/card)
  • Alarm someone if something is wrong (door isn't opened)
  • Don't drop medication on doormat (pets might eat it)

Appearence

  • Human-like features (eyes / face) could be nice, but are no must
  • A voice is appreciated
  • Recognizable as belonging to pharmacy

Personas

David and Maria

David (76) and Maria (73) are married for almost 50 years and are living together peacefully in their terraced house in a village in the Netherlands. David has some trouble with his heart, for which he needs medication every day and Maria has very painful rheumatism for which she has to inject medicine once every few weeks. They both have a smartphone and luckily, their children and grandchildren helped them understand how to use it. When they want to install a new app, they need to ask for help, but once the app is installed and explained they know how to use it pretty well. David and Maria take a stroll every day to keep active, but during the COVID-19 outbreak, they are more careful when it comes to going outside and seeing other people, and they sometimes find it difficult to enter shops or pharmacies as they are relatively crowded.

Tom

Tom is 36 years old. He works in home care and really likes his job. It really pleases him to know that he can help these people stay at home a bit longer by regularly visiting them and helping them with whatever they need. For some people, he only needs to pick up medication (because they are not mobile enough themselves anymore), but after that, they can use them and do everything else on their own. This takes a lot of time, which he prefers to spend with people that really need his assistance with cleaning, taking medication, washing, or just having a nice conversation.

Betty

90 year old Betty still lives at home. Her husband died 12 years ago, but she refuses to leave their home to go to a care home. She’s got too many memories here. In the last few years, her family really saw her health declining. She needs more and more medicine and has dementia on top of that, so she also regularly forgets to take them. That is why they applied for home care. Now, someone comes to visit Betty every day to check on her and help her with tasks that she cannot do herself anymore. The home care helps with cleaning, picks up medication from the pharmacy, helps with managing Betty’s agenda, makes sure she takes her pill on time and whatever she needs besides that.

Samantha

Samantha (31) works in a pharmacy in Eindhoven, she has worked there for 5 years and loves to interact with her regular customers, who are primarily elderly patients. During the Covid-19 outbreak Samantha is worried about how some of these patients are collecting their medication, as many of them have serious medical conditions. Sometimes family members come in to collect it but some elderly patients do not have any family to help them with this task and so they come to the pharmacy themselves. This is particularly worrying because recently the pharmacies have been extremely full as people have begun to panic and buy more medication than usual, and it is difficult to maintain social distance within the pharmacy, leaving the elderly at a higher risk for infection. Samantha believes that the pharmacies should be decongested, both for her and her colleagues safety and her patients. She is willing to try out new techniques to make this possible.

Scenario (key words)

  • Pharmacy where Samantha works uses our robot
  • She checks deliveries for today in her app and fills coloured compartments with right medication
  • Yesterday, emails with the codes sent to customers (or SMS or letter or device that customers own, still need to make decisions on that)
  • Database tells her exactly which medication in which compartment
  • Best route is already calculated by algorithm
  • When all compartments for this delivery are filled, she sends robot on its way and has time for regular clients in the pharmacy


  • Robot arrives at house David and Maria
  • They get a notification in their app / their device for OTP / another way that the robot arrived
  • They open door and robot says “Hello, good afternoon! I have your delivery for today. Please enter your unique code” (email/SMS/device thingy)
  • They enter the code, but wrong. Robot tells “Sorry, I’m afraid that is not the correct code, please try again”
  • Enter again, correct
  • “Now, please enter your birth date” (or other knowledge factor password)
  • The correct door automatically opens
  • Retrieve medication
  • “Good day! See you next time”


  • Tom is going to Betty after he received a message in his app that the robot is on its way
  • With the track and trace feature, he is sure that he is there on time
  • When robot arrives, he gets message and follows all the steps (OTP, password/birth date, retrieve medication)
  • He helps Betty take her medication for today
  • In his app, he checks if the next delivery is already planned and if all the data is correct
  • He changes the time window


  • Robot goes back to pharmacy after delivered everything

Specifications

Appearance

Lock system

Authentication

Security of information (or in our case medication) is one of the concerns that have kept organizations busy since the usage of the internet began to grow. Authentication ensures that a user is who they claim to be. A lot of preceding studies distinguish three types of authentication factors [26][27]:

  • Knowledge-based factors (something you know)
  • Possession-based factors (something you have)
  • Biometric-based factors (something you are)

Some studies also acknowledge a fourth type:

  • Somewhere you are / someone you know

Single factor authentication [27]

Examples of single factor authentication are possessing an ID card and swiping it to gain access into a facility or the traditional user-password scheme. The latter has the following features:

  • Easy to implement
  • Requires no special equipment
  • Easy to forget
  • Can be susceptible to shoulder surfing
  • Security based on password strength
  • Lack of identity check
  • Cost of support increases

However, regarding security, there are some issues with this form of single factor authentication. There are a lot of rules to generate strong passwords, but this makes them a lot more difficult to remember. People write them down to remember them, which makes them way less secure. Therefore, multi-factor authentication might be the solution.

Multi-factor authentication [27]

Multi-factor authentication makes use of two or more of the factor categories (and not using multiple examples of the same factor). A well known example is inserting a credit card (something you own) and typing in the pin code (something you know). Another example that is used a lot (in E-banking or investment sectors) is the combination of a password (something you know) and a token (something you own). This is the concept of a One Time Password (OTP) and it is a lot less susceptible to cracking than a static password. Randomly choosing this OTP is very important, because predicting the new password would be too easy if it is not random. In addition, OTPs are too difficult to remember, so an additional type of technology is needed.

As a third factor, biometric authentication can be used. This can provide identification or verification. Examples are fingerprint recognition, face recognition, voice recognition and iris scan. It is easy to use, but generally still quite expensive. A big advantage is that it provides real evidence about the person's identity compared to passwords/knowledge/items that can be stolen.

The fourth factor (either somewhere you are or someone you know) is used a lot less often than the other three.

Existing technologies

DHL/PostNL Lockers

In 2017, the first DHL Lockers could be seen in the Netherlands[28] [29]. Instead of a delivery at your home, you can choose to let your package be delivered in one of their yellow lockers. In the Netherlands, there are 3000 DHL Locker points, so there is always one close to your house and they're accessible day and night. If you've sent your parcel to a locker, a unique code will be texted or emailed to you. With this code, you can open your locker. PostNL has a comparable service[30]. Their orange lockers can also be used to send or receive parcels and can also be opened with a unique code (that gets send to you by email or SMS).

BENU pharmacies

BENU is one of the leading healthcare providers in the Netherlands. One service BENU pharmacies provides is the take out machine for all kinds of medication [31]. The service is free, you don't have to wait in line when picking up medication and in most pharmacies it is possible to pick up medicine 24/7 when using this machine. The medicine can be achieved by entering a unique code (sent to you by SMS or e-mail) and your birth date for veryfication.

Keycards and digilocks

A number of companies specialized in digital locks for doors, vaults and other property [32] [33] [34]. Add eleboration

Interviews

In the interviews with potential users, multiple options for the authentication were mentioned. One idea that a lot of people came up with was a simple password or (4-digit) code. This can be either a personal, static password or another password per delivery (in literature described as OTP). The advantages of one password for each user is that is is always the same and thus easy an not too confusing. On the other hand, it is easy to forget (although a bit less with a 4 digit code) and it is easy to crack and used by other people. An OTP is a lot more secure than a static password and entering it is still easy. It is already used in a lot of existing services and can be used by anyone who has email, a mailbox or a phone (so basically everyone). Drawbacks of an OTP is that an email can sometimes be hard to find, can end up in the spam folder, or can be deleted by accident. Physical mail can get lost or opened by the wrong person. Also, if a person gets a lot of deliveries, all the different messages with different passwords might get confusing.

One suggestion from a participant was to let the delivery robot ask a personal security question. The user could answer this questions, which would open the compartment. This seems very easy and intuitive, but turned out not to be preferred by some other interviewees. In addition, speech recognition might be more difficult to implement than other options and it would be a challenge to decide who sets the questions or to check if it’s secure enough.

According to a lot of participants, the use of a keycard for opening something is the easiest method of all. It is possible that someone loses it, but that happens less often than forgetting a password. The action is really simple and understandable for everyone. It is, however, more difficult and perhaps expensive to give every user their own keycard. If only regular clients can use this system, it would not be optimal, but implementing different systems within one robot would also quickly get costly.

Another way of opening secured compartments, currently already used in some delivery robots, is through an app on your smartphone. People had varying responses to this suggestion. Some thought it would be a really good option. Every person always has his phone nearby and even elderly use them quite often and know how to (up to a certain level). Other participants did not really like this idea, because they thought some (older) people really struggle with smartphones and would not be able to use the service optimally. Also, you would have a problem if the battery of your phone just died when the delivery is ready. One great benefit of using an app is that it has a lot more functionality than other options. In addition to having a function to open the compartment, it can contain a possibility to place new orders, to follow your current order, or to gain more information about your medication.

Conclusion

Based on the suggestions in literature in combination with the findings of the user interviews, the decision is made to use a two-factor authentication. Some medication is quite expensive, so it should be transported secure enough. In addition, dangerous situations can occur if certain medication gets delivered to the wrong person. This led to the conclusion that a one-factor authentication is not enough for this type of deliveries. The most practical and feasible option (which still satisfies the user's desires) is the combination of an OTP (ownership factor) and a knowledge factor authentication. This can be the birth date of the user as verification, but research into the security of this still needs to be done (see section on security). Important in the final decision is that a compromise between security and user-friendlyness should be found.

In this section about security, the communication method is also analysed. The OTP should be communicated to the user through email/SMS or a physical letter. Another option is to give a small device to all the users (comparable to the ones that some banks use) which gives another code every time. There are pros and cons regarding user satisfaction, but also regarding security. After an analysis, a compromise should be found again.

Classification users

Participant 1 (care home)

Here, codes from 1 to 4 are used to indicate how much assistence people need with their medication. The codes are established by a nationwide medication safety policy.

Code 1. Completely independent, takes care of everything on their own

Code 2. Has the roll with medication in own management. Carers and/or pharmacy delivers roll weekly

Code 3. The medication is given per separate time

Code 4 The medication is given per separate time and carers make sure it is taken as well

With human insight, people working in the care home decide the code for every resident. People with cognitive problems usually have code 3 or 4. With code 1 or 2, the user is responsible for taking their medicine. With code 3 or 4 the carer is. For the content of the baxterrolls, the pharmacy and/or GP are responsible.

MMSE score

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0004951405700349

"The Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) is a brief test of cognitive impairment used widely to screen for dementia. The original test, developed by Folstein et al (1975), includes questions about orientation, attention, recall, and language. Galasko et al (1990) developed a shorter version of the test (Modified MMSE) that is as sensitive as the complete test.

A score of 23 out of a possible 30 is recommended as the cut-off score for dementia (Folstein et al 1975)."

CPS Score

Has an equivalent MMSE score

https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/NursingHomeQualityInits/Downloads/NHQIPAC_QM_Appendix2.pdf

The CPS scores range from 0 to 6, with 0 indicating intact cognitive function and 6 very severe impairment.

CPS_1 = Borderline intact;

CPS_2 = Mild impairment;

CPS_3 = Moderate impairment;

CPS_4 = Moderately severe impairment;

CPS_5 = Severe impairment;

CPS_6 = Very severe impairment.

Planning and time schedule optimization

The vehicle routing problem is studied a lot by different researchers. Usually, it is represented by weighted simple graph. The nodes are customers and the arcs the shortest paths computed according to a single criterion (like traveling cost, distance or traveling time). An alternative approach exists, which is multigraph representation [35]. Thsi approach takes multiple attributes into account and can thus also plan the optimal route with operational constraints. A popular example of this is the Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows (VRPTW). Here, customer requests to deliver within a specific time window are satisfied and still the optimal route is found. This is, for example, really important with perishable products.[36] Some research is also done into path planning with Heterogeneous Multirobot Teams already. [37]

For our delivery robots, the multigraph representation seems to be a good approach. Users need to be able to indicate a prefered time window (just like with DHL/PostNL and other delivery services now), but it is not feasible to guarantee that delivery is at the exact same time every time. Of course the window can be indicated long before the actual delivery, so if it is a regular customer, this window can be the same every time.

Approach

To achieve the objectives of the project five main parts of the development process have been defined: research, requirements analysis, specification analysis, implementation and testing. To better tackle each phase regular group meetings every week have been set. During these meetings the tasks for the current development processes phase are assigned to each team member.

Group organization

Each week a different group member occupies the position of chairperson. The responsibility of the chairperson is to establish an agenda before the meeting and mediate the discussion through the topics that are set in the agenda. Furthermore the chairperson must take the minutes of every meeting during that week and act as a representative of the group during the tutor meeting. The chairperson role rotates through the members in the team.

Chairperson Rotation
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6
Mijntje Dajt Danielle Fabiènne Lucia Mijntje

Development process

Development Process

The first phase of the development processes of the project is the research. During the latter the literature is consulted to establish the state of the art. Moreover the problem statement is specified and the different stakeholders are analysed. A comprehensive plan is set to fix the deadlines of the other phases.

The second phase is the requirements analysis. This is a fundamental step of the development processes as the requirements will define the functionality of the project. A cost-benefit and risk assessment analysis will cover the requirements for every part of the project. The ethical evaluation will focus on the requirements for the application and the compartment system prototype, while the survey will focus on the requirements for the navigation simulation.

The third phase of the development processes is the specification analysis. During this phase the requirements are formalized using UML diagrams. The design of the user interface of the app is defined and the hypothetical maps that the delivery robots must navigate are designed in NetLogo.

The fourth phase is the implementation. The application code is written in Swift, creating an app compatible with devices supporting iOS, the hardware for the compartment system is assembled and the NetLogo program for the delivery simulation is written.

During the fifth and final phase of the development process the system is tested and a demo is finally created.

Planning

From the approach a plan for the development process was created. The plan is illustrated in the following figure using a Gantt table.

Gantt table of the planning

Task Division

During each development process phase the different task composing it are subdivided between the group members.

Research Requirements Specification Implementation Testing
Task Group member Task Group member Task Group member Task Group member Task Group member
Determining subject All Risk Assessment ... App Users ... App User ... Test system ...
Set up Wiki Fabiènne Cost-Benefit Analysis ... App enterprise ... App enterprise ... Make demo video ...
Approach Dajt, Danielle Ethical perspective ... Robot compartment system ... Robot compartment system ... Update Wiki ...
Planning Fabiènne, Dajt Make survey ... Navigation ... Navigation system ...
Literature search All Analyse data survey ... Update Wiki ... Update Wiki ...
Introduction Mijntje, Fabiènne, Dajt Update Wiki ...
State of the Art Lucia, Mijntje
Stakeholder analysis Danielle
Update Wiki Fabiènne, Danielle, Dajt

Milestones

By the end of week 2 the problem statement, introduction, stakeholder analysis and state of the art must be completed. This will conclude the research phase.

By the end of week 3 the survey on people’s attitudes towards our proposal and delivery robots in general, the risk assessment, and different analysis must be completed. This will conclude the requirements phase.

By the end of week 4 the analysis/conclusions of the survey and a semi-formal model of the system must be completed. This will conclude the specification phase.

By the end of week 6 the first implementation of the apps, lock system and navigation system must be completed. This will conclude the implementation phase.

By the end of week 7 the adjusted version of the apps (after testing/interviewing) and a demo video must be completed. This will conclude the testing phase.

Deliverables

The final product will be a system to distribute/deliver medicine to those in need (elderly in most cases), including:

  • An application with the choice to log in as a user to order medicine and open the compartments of the delivery robot or as the pharmacist/hospital/doctor/distributor to set the passwords for the compartments and the targets the delivery robot must visit.
  • A hardware system to secure and open the compartments, which can communicate with the application.
  • A NetLogo program in which an agent, representing a delivery robot, finds the shortest path among multiple targets within an environment modelling the map of a city or an indoor environment, for example an ICU.

Logbook

Week 1

Name Total hours Tasks
Danielle 3.5 Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 5-11) [1.5]
Lucia 3 Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 22-26) [1]
Mijntje 3 Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 18-21) [1]
Dajt 3.5 Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 14-18) [1.5]
Fabiènne 4 Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 1-4, 11-13) [1.5], wiki page [0.5]

Week 2

Name Total hours Tasks
Danielle 7.5 Meeting [2], images (Approach/Stakeholder) [1.5], stakeholder analysis [2], update wiki [0.5], tutor meeting [0.5], interview questions [0.5], informed consent editing [0.5]
Lucia 8 Meeting [2], state of the art [5], hardware research [0.5], tutor meeting [0.5]
Mijntje 9.5 Meeting [2], state of the art [7], tutor meeting [0.5]
Dajt 9 Agenda [0.5], meeting [2], approach [2], planning (tables) [2.5], problem statement [0.5], update wiki [1], tutor meeting [0.5]
Fabiènne 8 Meeting [2], literature research (source 27-30) [0.5], planning [0.5], references [1.5], update wiki [2], tutor meeting [0.5], contacting people to interview [0.5], interview questions [0.5], informed consent forms [0]

Week 3

Name Total hours Tasks
Danielle 9 Contacting pharmacists [1.5], conducting interviews [3.5], transcribing interviews [1.5], update wiki [0.5], meeting [1], tutor meeting [0.5], summarize needs interviews [0.5]
Lucia 1.5 Meeting [1], tutor meeting [0.5]
Mijntje 1.5 Meeting [1], tutor meeting [0.5], due to illness no other work done
Dajt 1.5 Meeting [1], tutor meeting [0.5]
Fabiènne 12.5 Preparation interviews [0.5], conducting interviews [2], transcribing interviews [3], update wiki page [2], meeting [1], tutor meeting [0.5], summarize needs interviews [1], research lock system [1.5], research cognitive classification [1]

Week 4

Name Total hours Tasks
Danielle 2 Tutor meeting [0.5], meeting [1.5]
Lucia 2 Tutor meeting [0.5], meeting [1.5]
Mijntje 2 Tutor meeting [0.5], meeting [1.5]
Dajt 2 Tutor meeting [0.5], meeting [1.5]
Fabiènne 9 Tutor meeting [0.5], agenda [1], meeting [1.5], personas [0.5], update wiki page [1.5], lock system [2.5], route planning/optimizations [1.5], scenario []

Week 5

Name Total hours Tasks
Danielle ... ...
Lucia ... ...
Mijntje ... ...
Dajt ... ...
Fabiènne ... ...

Week 6

Name Total hours Tasks
Danielle ... ...
Lucia ... ...
Mijntje ... ...
Dajt ... ...
Fabiènne ... ...

Week 7

Name Total hours Tasks
Danielle ... ...
Lucia ... ...
Mijntje ... ...
Dajt ... ...
Fabiènne ... ...

References

  1. Holstein, B. (2020). Coronavirus 101. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners : Jnp, 2020 Apr 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2020.03.021
  2. 2.0 2.1 Okyere, M. A., Forson, R., & Essel-Gaisey, F. (2020). Positive Externalities of an Epidemic: The Case of the Corona Virus (COVID-19) in China. Journal of Medical Virology, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.25830
  3. Skorup, B., & Haaland, C. (2020). How drones can help fight the coronavirus. Ssrn Electronic Journal, (2020). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3564671
  4. Peleato, F., Prabakar, M., & Kim, J.-H. (2013). Smart Global Positioning System for Autonomous Delivery Robots in Hospitals. 2013 29th Southern Biomedical Engineering Conference. doi: 10.1109/sbec.2013.79
  5. Summerfield, M. R., Seagull, F. J., Vaidya, N., & Xiao, Y. (2011). Use of pharmacy delivery robots in intensive care units. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 68(1), 77–83. doi: 10.2146/ajhp100012
  6. 6.0 6.1 de Groot, S. (2019).
  7. 7.0 7.1 Frachtenberg, E. (2019). Practical drone delivery. Computer, 52(12), 53–57.
  8. Bärtschi, A., Chalopin, J., Das, S., Disser, Y., Geissmann, B., Graf, D., … Mihalák, M. (2016). Collaborative Delivery with Energy-Constrained Mobile Robots LK - https://tue.on.worldcat.org/oclc/8087243524. In TA - TT -. Springer SE -.
  9. 9.0 9.1 N. Nishino, R. Tsugita, D. Chugo, S. Yokota, S. Muramatsu and H. Hashimoto (2016). Robot navigation according to the characteristics of pedestrian flow. IECON 2016 - 42nd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 5947-5952.
  10. K. Song et al. (2018). Navigation Control Design of a Mobile Robot by Integrating Obstacle Avoidance and LiDAR SLAM. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), 1833-1838.
  11. Kummerle, R., Ruhnke, M., Steder, B., Stachniss, C., Burgard, W., & 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2013 Karlsruhe, DEU 2013 05 06 - 2013 05 10. (2013). A navigation system for robots operating in crowded urban environments. Proceedings - Ieee International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 3225-3232, 3225–3232. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2013.6631026
  12. Berbeglia, G., Cordeau Jean-François, Gribkovskaia, I., & Laporte, G. (2007). Static pickup and delivery problems: a classification scheme and survey. Top, 15(1), 1–31.
  13. Hada, Y., Takase, K., Gakuhari, H., & Herneldan, E. (2004). Delivery service robot using distributed acquisition, actuators and intelligence. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37566). doi: 10.1109/iros.2004.1389865
  14. Freehill-Maye, L. (2019). The delivery drivers. Foodservice Director, 32(12), 30–30.
  15. Redman, R. (2019). Walmart, target, walgreens to pilot fedex delivery robot. Supermarket News, (feb 28, 2019).
  16. Costelloe, K. (2019). Amazon selects irvine for scout robot delivery. Orange County Business Journal, 42(33), 4–4.
  17. K, L. N., Kumaran, D. N. M., G, R., Arshadh, H., I, D., & V, C. (2019). Design and fabrication of medicine delivery robots for hospitals. Ssrn Electronic Journal, (2019). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3432156
  18. Ranft, B., & Stiller, C. (2016). The role of machine vision for intelligent vehicles. Ieee Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2016.2551553
  19. J. Kim, Y. Kim, J. Kwak, D. Hong and J. An (2010). Wheel & Track hybrid robot platform for optimal navigation in an urban environment, Proceedings of SICE Annual Conference 2010, 881-884.
  20. 20.0 20.1 Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & de Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transportation Research Part F: Psychology and Behaviour, 32, 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014
  21. Jarotwan, K. (2018). Analysis of environmental impacts of drone delivery on an online shopping system. Advances in Climate Change Research, 9(3), 201–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2018.09.001
  22. Io, H. N., Lee, C. B., & 2019 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, IEEM 2019 2019 12 15 - 2019 12 18. (2019). What are the sentiments about the autonomous delivery robots. Ieee International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 50-53, 50–53. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM44572.2019.8978921
  23. Simmons, R., Goodwin, R., Haigh, K. Z., Koenig, S., & Sullivan, J. O. (1996). A Layered Architecture for O ce Delivery Robots.
  24. Marks, M. (2019). Robots in Space: Sharing Our World with Autonomous Delivery Vehicles. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3347466
  25. Hoffmann, T., & Prause, G. (2018). On the regulatory framework for last-mile delivery robots. Machines, 6(3), 33–33. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines6030033
  26. Mohammed, M. M., & Elsadig, M. (2013). A multi-layer of multi factors authentication model for online banking services. 2013 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTING, ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC ENGINEERING (ICCEEE), 220–224. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCEEE.2013.6633936
  27. 27.0 27.1 27.2 Abhishek, K., Roshan, S., Kumar, P., & Ranjan, R. (2013). A Comprehensive Study on Multifactor Authentication Schemes BT - Advances in Computing and Information Technology (N. Meghanathan, D. Nagamalai, & N. Chaki, eds.). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 556-563
  28. TEST COMPACTE KLUISWAND VOOR PAKKETTEN IN NEDERLAND
  29. https://www.dhlparcel.nl/en/consumer/dhl-locker
  30. https://www.postnl.nl/campagnes/pakket-en-briefautomaat/
  31. https://www.benuapotheek.nl/service/afhalen/afhaalautomaat
  32. https://www.getkisi.com/keycard-access-systems#what-is-access-control
  33. https://www.digilock.com/about/
  34. https://www.vaultlocks.com/
  35. Ben Ticha, H., Absi, N., Feillet, D., & Quilliot, A. (2017). Empirical analysis for the VRPTW with a multigraph representation for the road network. Computers & Operations Research, 88, 103–116. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2017.06.024
  36. Wang, X., Sun, X., Dong, J., Wang, M., & Ruan, J. (2017). Optimizing Terminal Delivery of Perishable Products considering Customer Satisfaction. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2017, 8696910. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8696910
  37. Mathew, N., Smith, S. L., & Waslander, S. L. (2015). Planning Paths for Package Delivery in Heterogeneous Multirobot Teams. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 12(4), 1298–1308. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2015.2461213