MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076836611 · doi:10.1115/imece2008-67678

An Intelligent Socially Assistive Robot for Health Care

2008· article· en· W2076836611 on OpenAlexaff
Junichi Terao, Lina Trejos, Zhe Zhang, Goldie Nejat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman–computer interactionRobotComputer sciencePaceCategorizationTask (project management)Health careQuality (philosophy)Human–robot interactionGestureArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of socially assistive robots for health care applications can provide measurable improvements in patient safety, quality of care, and operational efficiencies by playing an increasingly important role in patient care in the fast pace of crowded clinics, hospitals and nursing/veterans homes. However, there are a number of research issues that need to be addressed in order to design such robots. In this paper, we address two main limitations to the development of intelligent socially assistive robots: (i) identification of human body language via a non-contact sensory system and categorization of these gestures for determining the accessibility level of a person during human-robot interaction, and (ii) decision making control architecture design for determining the learning-based task-driven behavior of the robot during assistive interaction. Preliminary experiments presented show the potential of the integration of the aforementioned techniques into the overall design of such robots intended for assistive scenarios.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.369 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207