“Let's read a book together”: A Long-term Study on the Usage of Pre-school Children with Their Home Companion Robot
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
In several countries, social robots are increasingly accessible within homes, particularly in those with pre-school-aged children. However, research on social robots has mostly been conducted in laboratory or classroom settings, and their long-term use has received little attention. Additionally, while there is a growing body of literature on CRI in a variety of domains such as education and health, less is known about the interactions between children and social robots in home settings during daily activities. Conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic, this article describes a longitudinal mixed-method study that examines children's interactions with their home reading companion robot - Luka. Focusing on parental perspectives, we examined how children interact with robots over time and revealed that a social robot with reading as its primary function has the potential to both attract parental buyers and engage children in long-term use of the robot's diverse features. We offer recommendations for social robot designers and product developers targeting younger users.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.092 | 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