MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404553415 · doi:10.1145/3687272.3688310

Research by Design: Mirrly a Humanoid Robot for Child-Robot Interaction

2024· article· en· W4404553415 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Yamini, Ana Djurkovic, Vanessa Italia Anne Hughes, Cory J. Smith, Brandon J. DeHart, Kerstin Dautenhahn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanoid robotRobotComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionSimulationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mirrly is a new humanoid robot designed to facilitate human-robot social interactions, focusing on applications in therapy and education for children. Inspired by the need for engaging and effective interactions, Mirrly’s design incorporates a friendly appearance, articulated expressive face, and multimodal interaction capabilities. A key goal of designing Mirrly was keeping costs low while still retaining affective and expressive qualities of the robot. This paper presents the process of development and design of Mirrly. We also delve into the decisions we made to choose and design hardware, software, and interactions. By comparing existing robots and exploring implications for future research, Mirrly demonstrates the potential for advancing Child-Robot Interaction in many application areas. The open-source nature of Mirrly’s platform further encourages collaboration and innovation in the research community, offering a versatile and potentially impactful platform for a diverse range of applications in human-robot social interactions.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207