Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

ar:past-meetings [2014/08/11 19:51] (current)
tmburdge created
Line 1: Line 1:
 +* 9/24/10, 1pm.  Discussed the status of the project, including what was learned over the summer, the status of our new Honda funding, and plans for the next round of clinical trials.
 +** The clinicians requested the following:
 +**# That the robot Troy is moved back to the clinic for use in therapy with one of the patients.
 +**# Some new robot behaviors, including songs with actions. ​ Tim Major will help with this task.
 +** We had a discussion on the technology that is used to view and code videos from therapies and pre- and post-assessments. ​ Bryan Morse indicated that his group may be able to help with vision-based tools. ​ Mike Goodrich proposed the idea of using a Wii remote to allow the therapists to tag when desirable behaviors occur in therapy to facilitate post-therapy retrieval and investigation of those behaviors.
 +** As part of our list of requirements for Honda: For the Honda imitation software to be useful, it must be able to be controlled by a single clinician.
 +** For future grant proposals, the idea of "​low-dose"​ robot therapies should be a prominent selling point.
 +** Some additional notes from this meeting are found [https://​facwiki.cs.byu.edu/​AR/​index.php/​Near-Term_Research_Tasks_--_Oct_2010 here].
 +* 2/4/10, 4pm.  We watched a compelling video of a child interacting with the robot Troy, and we discussed plans for a proposal to Willow Garage. ​
 +** Examples of initiation, joint attention, and triadic interaction were observed. ​ The child was not on the autism spectrum, but had some social impairments. ​ It appeared that Troy facilitated child-therapist interactions,​ but anecdote is not evidence.
 +** For Willow Garage, a proposal would need to tell the following story.
 +**# We need a robot and robot software that can be sustained in a lab for a long time even without a company providing these.
 +**# To accomplish this, we would like to adopt an open source model for both robot and software.
 +**# This would not only facilitate sustainability in our lab, but could also help make it possible for other clinics to adopt successful strategies for robot-assisted therapies.
 +* 12/7/2009, meeting with Behzad and Kikuo. ​ Here is a summary of our discussions:​
 +**What is the most important needed technology for robot-assisted therapies?
 +**# Guiding principle: to use a robot in therapy, the clinician can't do other therapies. ​ Therefore, importance is defined by what makes a therapist more powerful either because the technology allows something to be done faster/more completely or because it enables something that couldn'​t be done in other ways.
 +**# Gesture recognition might be helpful because it could allow the therapist to ''​naturally''​ shape robot behavior.
 +**# A combination of preprogrammed robot behavior and imitation might be helpful because it could allow the therapist to "​naturally"​ move through a therapeutic plan/​script.
 +**# Allowing the robot to imitate the child directly would be very useful because it would open up new clinical opportunities. ​ I believe that Honda said that they would look into this.
 +**# Programming by demonstration is probably not very important right now.
 +** How can we best coordinate our work with other projects for robot-assisted therapy?
 +**# Mataric'​s work, Scaz's work, and Dautenhahn'​s work.
 +**# [http://​www.soc.northwestern.edu/​justine/​jc_papers.htm Cassell'​s work] on virtual actors in therapies.
 +** How can we calibrate expectations so that they match emerging capabilities in robot-assisted therapies?
 +**# Focus on supporting the therapist.
 +**# Focus on helping low-functioning children.
 +**# Emphasize using the robot to prime social/​emotional '​wiring'​ in a child -- engage and prime.
 +**# Use sabotage to turn attention to therapist.
 +**# Reward social/​emotional interaction with therapist, using the robot as part of the reward.
 +**# Shift from child-robot interactions to child-therapist actions, with the goal of eventually phasing out the robot.
 +** What is the development plan?
 +**# Identify technologies on the critical path.
 +**# Constrain technology developments by those that could be used in real therapies in real practice.
 +**# Modify technologies and therapies by introducing therapies into the clinic using pilot studies and carefully controlled clinical trials.
 +** What gestures from the robot or recognized by the robot would be most useful?
 +**# Touchdown -- elation
 +**# Hands on hips -- disappointment
 +**# Hand on head -- puzzlement
 +**# Beckoning, waving clapping
 +* 11/5/09, [http://​www.gel.usherbrooke.ca/​michaudf/​ Francois Michaud] visited BYU. The schedule for his visit can be [[found here]].
 +* 10/29/09, 2pm.  We met as a complete team to discuss work in the clinic. ​ We also discussed [https://​ras.papercept.net/​conferences/​scripts/​abstract.pl?​ConfID=20&​Number=699 this paper.] ​ Here is a summary of our discussion:
 +** We believe that imitation will be necessary, but recognize that the Honda imitation software must be improved before it can be used in the clinic.  ​
 +**# We will explore better configurations for the lab, e.g., position of the camera, orientation of the clinician and child, etc.
 +**# We hope that Behzad will be able to help us tune the software to make it more robust when he visits in November.
 +**# We expect that Honda will need to improve the software before it will be usable in the clinic.
 +**# As a fallback for using the software, Jonathan and Sukhbat are learning how to use imitation to program robot behaviors.
 +** It is time to try Nicole'​s robot and Dan's robot with some children.
 +**# The clinicians will need to be trained on using the GUI (graphical user interface) software.
 +**# The engineers will need to work with the clinicians to create behaviors that can be used in the clinic.
 +**# Alan Atherton will lead an effort to make the GUI software reliable enough to use.
 +**# Jonathan will work on creating a Wiimote controller to manage behavior sequencing.
 +** The paper that we discussed had some great technology for doing eye tracking, but 
 +**# We wonder about the therapeutic effectiveness of creating fully autonomous robots, since there are problems in believing that developing social skills with robots will transfer to the real world.
 +**# Although eye gaze is correlated with attention, it is an overstatement to conclude that just because a child with autism is gazing at something that he or she is attending to it.
  
 +* 8/17/09, 11am.  We met as a complete team earlier today to work out the details of moving BYU and Honda technology into the clinic. ​ Here is a summary of our discussion:
 +**       We will initially introduce two technologies into the clinic:
 +**#       Honda ML software and avatar, with the ability to imitate the clinician in real time and playback pre-recorded behaviors. ​ The software is ready. ​ We are now working on some issues related to camera and projector placement.
 +**#      Pleo, with pre-recorded behaviors that can be activated by the clinician via a handheld PDA.  The software is ready to do this already, and we are working with the  clinicians to identify which behaviors they would like available.
 +**       Time frame for introduction of technologies:​
 +**#     Pleo: 1-2 weeks
 +**#   Honda software: 2-3 weeks.
 +**       ​Bonnie,​ Martin, and Lee have identified two children with autism to participate in initial studies.
 +**       After introducing the avatar and Pleo, we will then introduce a humanoid Lego robot. ​ This robot will also be capable of pre-recorded behaviors, and imitation using the ML software. ​ Prototype hardware and interface software are ready to go.  We are working on a few improvements before placing the system in the clinic within a couple of months. ​
 +
 +*6/2/09, 1 pm, in the ME Conference Room (445 CTB).  Discussed near-term strategies for using robot technology in the clinic. We will also discussed this [http://​www.et.byu.edu/​groups/​tilar/​mobile_robots.PDF paper]. Alan Olsen  demonstrated the Pleo robot.
 +
 +* 3/​26-3/​27/​09. ​ Behzad Dariush from Honda Research Institute visited BYU.  The group meeting, software work meetings, clinic visit, and lab tours were all very useful. ​ During our meetings several ideas were discussed. ​ Here is a summary of some of the key points:
 +** Near-term work:
 +**# Use Pleo robot in clinical settings to get a feel for the types of behaviors that can be elicited.
 +**# Investigate the use of Honda software to imitate the therapist, rather than the child, in therapy sessions. ​ This may promote interactions between the child and therapist, who is the key to initiating robot behaviors. ​ Two potential implementations:​
 +**#*The robot or avatar imitates the therapist directly.
 +**#* Online gesture recognition is used as a way to control/​initiate autonomous behaviors of the robot or avatar. ​ This could be used to control Pleo or another robot (possibly LEGO Mindstorms).
 +**# Use Honda software to do offline programming of robot and avatar behaviors. ​ This may be a convenient way for therapists to program robots through imitation.
 +**# Create a bi-directional software interface to allow BYU researchers to access motion variables in Honda software. ​ To start, access to "key points"​ and generalized coordinates would be useful.
 +**# Develop new behaviors for Pleo and create a remote control interface that will allow therapists to invoke different behaviors.
 +**Long-term work:
 +**# Continue development of a small, upper-body, humanoid robot. ​ This robot will eventually be used in imitation, pointing, sabotage, and other activities.
 +**# Continue development of Honda software to enable pose imitation for small children.
 +
 +* 2/26/09, 4pm.  Discussed the "I Am Robot" paper by V. Groom, L. Takayama, P. Ochi, and C. Nass (to appear in HRI2009). ​ Discussed whether the absence of autonomy makes the Groom experiment simply a replication of Kiesler and Kiesler'​s decorated rock experiment. ​ Also discussed whether programming a robot'​s behavior is analogous to building the robot and, if so, whether this would lead to self-extension. ​ Finally, we discussed goals of the TiLAR project and ways the work might benefit real people. ​ Goals include (1) improving a therapist'​s ability to help children with autism or SLI, (2) understand the nature of ASD or SLI, and (3) improve diagnostic ability to differentiate between groups on the ASD spectrum. ​ Potential ways to benefit real people, in order of preference of the group, are (1) use robots as one stage of therapy to help a clinician improve the abilities of a child and (2) possibly provide an assistive device to a child that either allows them to be higher functioning or makes a caregiver'​s job easier by improving some aspect of caregiver-child interaction.
 +
 +* 1/15/09, 4 pm, in the CS Conference Room.  Martin, Bonnie, and Lee led a discussion on the clinical aspects of our work, including potential robot-based therapies. ​ Notes from our discussion are found [http://​www.et.byu.edu/​~mbc57/​clinical_considerations.doc here].
 +
 +* 12/4/08, 3 pm, in the CS conference room.  Mike Goodrich lead a discussion on the state-of-the-art in robot-assisted therapy. The presentation slides are found [http://​tanglefoot.cs.byu.edu/​~mike/​AssistiveRobotics/​RobotsInTherapies.pdf here].
 +
 +* 11/6/08, 3 pm, in the CS conference room.  A 1-hour Q&A session was held with [http://​cs-www.cs.yale.edu/​homes/​scaz/​ Brian Scassellati] from Yale university. ​ The schedule for Brian'​s visit is available [[here]].<​BR>​
 +
 +* 10/31/08, noon, in the CS conference room.  We discussed the state-of-the-art in robot face design and brainstormed about what kind of robot face should be used to maximize potential therapeutic benefits for children with ASD or SLI.  Perhaps most importantly,​ we discussed ways that we might gather data on what kind of face would be most useful without having to build several fully actuated robots. ​ Mark Colton will explore this idea further with the goal of gathering data that can be used to motivate a robot design as well as be shared with other researchers in a publication.<​BR>​
 +
 +* 10/23/08, 3 pm, in the CS conference room.<​br>​
 +
 +* 9/30/08, 4 pm, in the CS conference room. [[Sept 30, 2008]]<​br>​
ar/past-meetings.txt ยท Last modified: 2014/08/11 19:51 by tmburdge
Back to top
CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
chimeric.de = chi`s home Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki do yourself a favour and use a real browser - get firefox!! Recent changes RSS feed Valid XHTML 1.0