State-of-the-Art Assistive Technology for People with Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work is motivated by the expanding demand and limited supply of long-term personal care for People with Dementia (PwD), and assistive technology as an alternative. Telecare allows PwD to live in the comfort of their homes for a longer time. It is challenging to have remote care in smart homes with ambient intelligence, using devices, networks, and activity and plan recognition. Our scope is limited to mostly related work on existing execution environments in smart homes, and activity and plan recognition algorithms which can be applied to PwD living in smart homes. PwD and caregiver needs are addressed in a more holistic healthcare approach, domain challenges include doctor validation and erroneous behaviour, and technical challenges include high maintenance and low accuracy. State-of-the-art devices, networks, activity and plan recognition for physical health are presented; ideas for developing mental training for mental health and social networking for social health are explored. There are two implications of this work: more needs to be done for assistive technology to improve PwD’s mental and social health, and assistive software is not highly accurate and persuasive yet. Our work applies not only to PwD, but also the elderly without dementia and people with intellectual disabilities.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".