Dr Nicole Robinson is a research fellow at Monash University working across two disciplines – engineering and medicine. Specifically, robotics and psychology.

She’s led a new research trial offering a glimpse into the near-future of digital healthcare. It found social robots – as helpers – can deliver a multi-session behaviour-change treatment around diet and weight reduction without the need for human intervention.

The results showed a robot-delivered program helped people to cut snack “episodes” by half, and lose, on average, 4.4 kilograms in weight. The trial also found that an autonomous robot-delivered program may be as effective as a human clinician in the same context.

She talks to Lens about social robots, her research, and what the future might – or might not – hold.

Where did this interest in robotics – and robots – begin for you?

I’ve been interested in technology for a very long time. Any time there was a new gadget or tool available, it was always something I wanted to get my hands on. The idea of a social robot really sparked my imagination – it comes from a childhood dream of having robots around and seeing them in a societal context.

But you started off studying people?

I started in behavioural science learning about people, how they behave, and the things they do. Then I started getting more interested in robots, and how robots can interact with people, what they can do, and how they should operate in society.

It was a fantastic crossroad between the two disciplines I was interested in. We can look to behavioural science to find new ways to make robots more effective with people.

What exactly is a social robot?

A social robot is a robot that can communicate and interact with people. The first ideas in robotics would have been that robots would eventually talk to people, interact with them and be able to support them in their daily life whether that is at home, in society or in the workplace.

But you’re looking at them specifically in terms of health and wellbeing interventions with individuals?

Yes. The behavioural intervention side of things is still relatively new. There’s been previous work in digital health and wellbeing programs using smartphones and web-based digital applications. We were interested to see what the utility of social robots might have in the space to support health and wellbeing.

The trial you led was about unhealthy, high-calorie snack foods and drinks. What did you find out?

We developed the robotic health coach using principles from evidence-based practice, but shaped to be delivered by a robot. In the trial, people who did complete the treatment program worked through the steps provided by the robot, and made improvements to their diet intake.

There was an average weight loss of 4.4kg, and people decreased their snack episodes by over 50% after having a conversation with the robot about their behaviour. We’ve found it was effective without the need for human intervention, demonstrating that robots could be important tools to help promote healthy daily behaviour.

Why do you think it worked well?

When we talked to people about what was important to them, people mentioned that the robot is non-judgemental. It was able to have a discussion with a person about a behaviour that is sensitive to them, and talk to them about the steps they could take to make changes. If there is a behaviour that a person is embarrassed about – such as eating a lot of sugary drinks or cans of soda – then it might be easier to talk openly if you don’t feel as if you will be judged.

When you can have that open and honest conversation, and participate in treatment and come up with a plan that works best for you based on your current situation, then that’s something that can help support you to make a change.

Is there a threshold in robotics around attachment? You want people to feel comfortable, but not too comfortable?

Some see robots as a way to complete the steps, create a plan, and make those changes in real life. Others have a much more relational focus in terms of the interactions they had with the robot, such as the robot was very friendly, and provided support and emotional warmth. Robots can appeal to both sides.

The program is designed to prompt self-reflection. The robot goes through a series of questions designed to get people thinking about how they might make a change.

There seems to be a threshold where you want to develop the robot to be personable and friendly enough to work with in a treatment session, but not so much that it misrepresents what it is or what it can do. If we had the robot saying, ‘I understand how you feel’, that would not resonate too well, because people know robots can’t feel, in that sense.

We need to make sure that we make careful scripting choices so the robot appears to be supportive, but not so much that it comes across as fake and sterile.

How attached do some people get? Do they name the robot?

Some people do. Some feel quite fond of social robots – this concept of anthropomorphism where people give inanimate objects a sense of personality, emotion and human-like quality. For some people that feeling can be really quite strong; they can get a real sense of connection and understanding. For others, they see it as a machine, no different from a screen or a tablet or an interactive kiosk. They have no additional feelings. It’s a very individual thing.

It sounds like that strange episode of Black Mirror where a small robot takes over a girl’s life.

That’s definitely science-fiction. The concept comes up a lot when you talk about robotic systems that take on some form of human-like qualities. We’re nowhere near that level of sophistication. Social robots can’t operate to that level of autonomy or intelligence. Robots do what we program them to do.

How might it work for a person who wanted to cut down on soft drinks as part of their healthcare?

The program is designed to prompt self-reflection. The robot goes through a series of questions designed to get people thinking about how they might make a change. The robot might say, ‘if you wanted to make a change, what would you need to do?’ The robot would then be prompted to ask them to think about how they would create a plan to see positive change in their lifestyle.

It’s about asking questions and getting people to think about a goal that would work for them. That’s another fascinating thing. We did not have detailed personalisation in the robot interaction, but laying out these steps and getting people to think out loud, come up with a goal, plan and a strategy that works best, they found that they did improve their dietary intake and achieve some weight loss.

What are the next steps with this technology?

Looking at it in closer detail. Can we apply the social robot coach to other daily health areas? This includes making the robot interaction more personalised to each person, which might help to increase health behaviour for people that may need extra support or encouragement to make a start.

Could it work in addiction?

It’s possible. There’s an increased risk, so it should be paired with clinician support. The robot would then be an additional feature or treatment access point.

Do you anticipate resistance from clinicians to a robot taking on some aspects of health and wellbeing treatments?

The idea of a robot does spark some different interpretations of what that means, and what it would be like in real life. If we were programming a robot to act exactly like a clinician it would not be appropriate, and mostly likely met with some hesitation.

If a robot can be programmed to provide support to treatment, robots then become another technology that can extend the reach of the clinician to provide greater support to both patients and practitioners.

The post Diet and weight loss: Using social robots to support human health and wellbeing appeared first on Artificial Intelligence.

THE INSTITUTE Scientists around the world are pushing hard to develop new technologies to support frontline workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. While much of this tech includes assistive tools to support frontline workers with their tasks, some researchers have their eye on ways to reduce the need for these employees to conduct high-risk tasks—by giving the jobs to robots.

One of those researchers is IEEE Member Francesco Ferro, CEO of PAL Robotics. He contacted The Institute to let us know about the company’s arsenal of customizable robots.

Based in Barcelona, the company’s base models are designed for a variety of tasks, including socializing with people and transporting items. PAL Robotics has been exploring ways to use its existing base models—or build upon them—to aid in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. The effort has involved a lot of collaboration and adaptation in a short amount of time.

“The idea is to move fast and save lives,” Ferro says. “That is the all-important part.”

One model that could prove useful during the pandemic is Artificial Robot Intelligence (ARI), a mobile and social robot that can interact with people and ask them questions. PAL Robotics was already collaborating with seven other organizations—including ERM Automatismes Industriels, Heriot-Watt University, and the University of Trento—as part of a project called SPRING, to modify ARI for complex dialogue and interactions with people.

But as the pandemic began, the project’s partners agreed to broaden the focus to make it applicable in the fight against the virus.

With the right software, he says, ARI will be able to ask COVID-19 patients questions related to their symptoms, reducing how often healthcare workers must come into close contact with patients. Additional modifications to ARI will allow it to establish connections with e-health platforms and process patients’ medical data, Ferro says. The social robot could also be fitted with a thermal infrared camera to measure a person’s temperature.

“The goal is for the robot to be able to participate in different user cases in a hospital environment, such as welcoming newcomers to the waiting room, helping with check-in forms, providing information about the consultation agenda, acting as a guide to appointments, and also offering entertainment,” Ferro says. ARI will be able to give patients a more personalized experience, in part thanks to the sociability of the robot and its features such as voice recognition, deep learning, and ability to read emotions.

“Another particular advantage of ARI is that the robot can be teleoperated to enable caregivers to see, interact, and support patients in real time without physical interaction, which is very important in this pandemic period,” Ferro says.

PAL Robotics is also exploring ways to modify its mobile robot model, TIAGo Base (TIAGo stands for take it and go), to help out during the pandemic, Ferro says. A variety of add-ons can be incorporated into this bot, such as storage compartments to transport food and medications within hospitals.

The company is also planning to incorporate a UV light to kill viruses and bacteria. This adapted model, dubbed TIAGo Disinfection, could be sent into empty hospital rooms to systemically zap surfaces with the UV light, killing any lingering germs.  PAL Robotics is currently collaborating with a UV light manufacturer to create the new robotic appendage. Like ARI, TIAGo Disinfection could be equipped with an infrared camera to record patients’ temperatures.

The open-source framework, Robotics Operating System, is being used to program the robots. This allows the project’s collaborators and clients to easily incorporate their own software to customize the robot for different applications.

Ferro says the lockdown in Spain temporarily affected the manufacturing of the robots but the real bottleneck for getting ARI and the other bots on the front lines is certification from the EU Commission for their use in a healthcare setting, which is still pending.

“We have done safety assessments where we evaluate different hazardous situations—such as unexpected movement of the robot, electrical hazards related to charging, and mechanical hazards related to coupling with the robot joints—by indicating the probability of it happening and severity of the situation,” Ferro says.

As part of the next stage of the SPRING Project, ARI will undergo testing with human volunteers at some pilot tests sites, including the Broca Hospital in Paris.

“We are now trying to complete the pilot tests and are trying to develop solutions faster in an agile way in order to fulfill the real needs [brought on by the pandemic],” Ferro says. “We are pushing very hard for this.”

The post PAL Robotics Customizable Bots Could Be the Next Frontline Workers appeared first on Artificial Intelligence.

London, Aug 6 (IANS) Humans prefer interacting with faulty robots significantly more than with robots that function and behave flawlessly, new research has found.

For the study, published in the journal Frontiers in Robotics and AI, researchers examined how people react to robots that exhibit faulty behaviour compared to perfectly performing robots.

“Our results showed that the participants liked the faulty robot significantly more than the flawless one. This finding confirms the Pratfall Effect, which states that people’s attractiveness increases when they make a mistake,” said corresponding author Nicole Mirnig from University of Salzburg, Austria.

Although social robotics is a rapidly advancing field, social robots are not yet at a technical level where they operate without making errors.

Nevertheless, most studies in the field are based on the assumption of faultlessly performing robots.

“Alternatives resulting from unforeseeable conditions that develop during an experiment are often not further regarded or simply excluded,” Mirnig said.

The post Humans like faulty robots more than flawless ones appeared first on Artificial Intelligence.