Social Intelligence for a Robot Engaging People in Cognitive Training Activities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current research supports the use of cognitive training interventions to improve the brain functioning of both adults and children. Our work focuses on exploring the potential use of robot assistants to allow for these interventions to become more accessible. Namely, we aim to develop an intelligent, socially assistive robot that can engage individuals in person-centred cognitively stimulating activities. In this paper, we present the design of a novel control architecture for the robot Brian 2.0, which enables the robot to be a social motivator by providing assistance, encouragement and celebration during an activity. A hierarchical reinforcement learning approach is used in the architecture to allow the robot to: 1) learn appropriate assistive behaviours based on the structure of the activity, and 2) personalize an interaction based on user states. Experiments show that the control architecture is effective in determining the robot's optimal assistive behaviours during a memory game interaction.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it