MOTIVATION OF CHILDREN
WITH CEREBRAL PALSY
BY RAC-CP FUN
(ROBOTICS AGENT COACHER FOR CP
MOTOR FUNCTION)
Dr. Marina Fridin1...
CEREBRAL PALSY (CP)
- Spectrum of non-progressive syndromes of posture and
motor impairments that result from an insult to...
SOCIAL ASSISTIVE ROBOTICS (SAR)
- SAR is the class of robots that provide various types of assistance
to various vulnerabl...
Hands off
RAC CP Fun
Body Structure & Functions Activity Participation
Environmental
Factors
Personal
Factors
Health condi...
RAC CP Fun
Body Structure & Functions Activity Participation
Environmental
Factors
Personal
Factors
Therapist RAC CP Fun
H...
MOTIVATION AS PART OF A
GAME
Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
Embedded features...
SUBJECTS
Subject Gender Age (yrs) GMFCS
1 M 5.8 III
2 M 5.9 III
3 M 6.3 I
4 F 5.7 II
5 M 6.2 IV
6 M 5.8 III
7 M 6.1 II
8 M...
SETUP
Operator
Cameras
Staff
~0.8m
~0.5m
~2 m
Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
...
DATA ANALYSIS
• Interaction Level (IL)
• Cognitive Performance (V)
• Motor Performance
3
1
**
F
FSss FWSignECIL
Workshop o...
EXPERIMENT 1:
FIRST MEETING PROCEDURE
• AIM: the robot introduces itself to the children, explains it’s intention,
demonst...
Procedureflow
Interaction level
-10 0 10 20 30 40
Hello
Introduction
Song
Conversation
Motor game
Robot falls down
Explana...
• AIM: motor exercises (symmetrical, asymmetrical, and dual tasks)
• MOTIVATION: the robot is personal toy, personal feedb...
Procedureflow
Interaction level
0 5 10 15 20
Intro
SM
AM
DT
Motor performance
0 2 4 6
CP
ND
EXPERIMENT 3 :
“ROBY SAID”
• AIM: collaborative motor game (symmetrical, asymmetrical, and complex
tasks), selective atten...
EXPERIMENT 4:
”FOUR SEASONS”
• AIM: to explore a possibility to facilitate the development of spatial cognition
(as exampl...
Sketch Picture
IL
V
EXPERIMENT 5:
COMPLEX INTERACTION
• AIM: to test a constructive learning approach (using books and
furniture), accompanied...
VARIABILITY of REACTIONS
Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
E., 4 yrs, Hemiplegia...
THE SCHEME OF THE RAC CP FUN
MODULES AND DATA FLOW
Low-level Perception
• Kinect: Motion processing
• Robot’s Video:
High ...
SUMMARY
Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
Unconstrained interaction
Personal toy...
CONCLUSIONS
● RAC CP FUN is a feasible and promising new research
area of social assistive technology with immeasurable
po...
RESEARCH GROUP
Dr. Mark BelokopytovDr. Simona Bar-Haim
Bella DavidovGuy Keren
Ronit Aviram
MESHI Jerusalem
Workshop on Mot...
IROS 2012
THANK YOU FOR
ATTENTION
Social Assistive Robotics for children with Cerebral Palsy
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Social Assistive Robotics for children with Cerebral Palsy

749 views
605 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
749
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Gross motor function classification system
  • Our work to date demonstrates the promise of RAC CP FUN, a new research area of social assistive technology with immeasurable potential. SAR technology is still in its infancy, but the results of our experiment demonstrate how assistive robotic platforms can be used in the near future in hospitals and homes, in training and therapeutic programs that monitor, encourage, and assist their users. This multidisciplinary project will not only open a window to other advanced applications of advanced robotic interactive technology, but may also stimulate the development of new treatments for a wide variety of diseases and disorders through effective physiotherapy practice.
  • Our work to date demonstrates the promise of RAC CP FUN, a new research area of social assistive technology with immeasurable potential. SAR technology is still in its infancy, but the results of our experiment demonstrate how assistive robotic platforms can be used in the near future in hospitals and homes, in training and therapeutic programs that monitor, encourage, and assist their users. This multidisciplinary project will not only open a window to other advanced applications of advanced robotic interactive technology, but may also stimulate the development of new treatments for a wide variety of diseases and disorders through effective physiotherapy practice.
  • Social Assistive Robotics for children with Cerebral Palsy

    1. 1. MOTIVATION OF CHILDREN WITH CEREBRAL PALSY BY RAC-CP FUN (ROBOTICS AGENT COACHER FOR CP MOTOR FUNCTION) Dr. Marina Fridin1 Dr. Mark Belokopytov2,3 1Ariel University Center 2Assaf Harofeh Medical Center 3Ben-Gurion University of the Negev The Therapeutic and Educational Social Robotics Lab Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    2. 2. CEREBRAL PALSY (CP) - Spectrum of non-progressive syndromes of posture and motor impairments that result from an insult to the developing central nervous system • Characterized by: • body function impairments • activity limitations • participation limitations Often accompanied by disturbances of sensation, cognition, communication, perception, and/or behaviour. Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    3. 3. SOCIAL ASSISTIVE ROBOTICS (SAR) - SAR is the class of robots that provide various types of assistance to various vulnerable populations primarily through social, rather than physical interaction. • POPULATIONS: • Elderly: • Post- stroke rehabilitation, Matarić, et al., 2007 • Alzheimer’s disease , Tapus et..al. ,2009 • Hospital delivery robot, Mutlu & Forlizzi ,2008 • Nursing home residents , Wada et.al. , 2004 • Children, mainly for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) • Scassellati, et al. 2007. • Robins, et al., 2005. Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    4. 4. Hands off RAC CP Fun Body Structure & Functions Activity Participation Environmental Factors Personal Factors Health condition (disorder or disease)Therapist Hands on Motor Actions I N T E R N AT I O N A L C L A S S I F I C AT I O N O F F U N C T I O N I N G , D I S A B I L I T Y A N D H E A LT H ( I C F ) F R A M E W O R K , ( W H O , 2 0 0 2 ) Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    5. 5. RAC CP Fun Body Structure & Functions Activity Participation Environmental Factors Personal Factors Therapist RAC CP Fun Health condition (disorder or disease) Hands on Conceptual Interference Environment Taxonomy Learning Algorithm Hands off Human-Robot Interaction Motor GamesMotor Actions Adaptation to personality, mood and motor performance Motivation: feedback, mirroring effect Team Decomposition Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    6. 6. MOTIVATION AS PART OF A GAME Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012 Embedded features: • Play-like activate • Toy appearance of the robot • Emotional arousal • Variety of games NOT ENOUGH…
    7. 7. SUBJECTS Subject Gender Age (yrs) GMFCS 1 M 5.8 III 2 M 5.9 III 3 M 6.3 I 4 F 5.7 II 5 M 6.2 IV 6 M 5.8 III 7 M 6.1 II 8 M 6.3 III 9 M 4.9 IV 10 M 5.1 II 11 F 5.4 II Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012 All diagnosed as CP
    8. 8. SETUP Operator Cameras Staff ~0.8m ~0.5m ~2 m Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012 0.5m 1.2m 0.5m
    9. 9. DATA ANALYSIS • Interaction Level (IL) • Cognitive Performance (V) • Motor Performance 3 1 ** F FSss FWSignECIL Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012 RT AVE V )(1 Coding Performance 0 did not perform 1 attempt to perform - 2nd attempt 2 incomplete performance- 2nd attempt 3 attempt to perform - 1st attempt 4 complete performance- 2nd attempt 5 incomplete performance- 1st attempt 6 complete performance- 1st attempt
    10. 10. EXPERIMENT 1: FIRST MEETING PROCEDURE • AIM: the robot introduces itself to the children, explains it’s intention, demonstrates games, explains it’s limitations (ethical issues) • MOTIVATION: the robots create enjoyable interaction, emotional arousal, creates personal contact, reduces children’s and staff’s concern • RESULT: children enjoyed, actively played with robot, participated in the conversation with the robot , allowed the robot to be in their personal space Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    11. 11. Procedureflow Interaction level -10 0 10 20 30 40 Hello Introduction Song Conversation Motor game Robot falls down Explanation Parting 0 1 2 Execution CP ND
    12. 12. • AIM: motor exercises (symmetrical, asymmetrical, and dual tasks) • MOTIVATION: the robot is personal toy, personal feedback • RESULTS: high interaction, high performance (better then educational staff expected), possible correlation between exercise difficulty and motivation EXPERIMENT 2: ONE-TO-ONE MOTOR INVOLVEMENT Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    13. 13. Procedureflow Interaction level 0 5 10 15 20 Intro SM AM DT Motor performance 0 2 4 6 CP ND
    14. 14. EXPERIMENT 3 : “ROBY SAID” • AIM: collaborative motor game (symmetrical, asymmetrical, and complex tasks), selective attention • MOTIVATION: the robot initiates and mediates a social game • RESULTS: children enjoy, high interaction, improvement in motor performance and selective attention • CHALLENGE: variability of children’s reactions and abilities, need of “social psychology” approach (despair attention, feedback, adaptive game’s flow) Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    15. 15. EXPERIMENT 4: ”FOUR SEASONS” • AIM: to explore a possibility to facilitate the development of spatial cognition (as example of cognitive abilities) of the children • MOTIVATION: competition between children, experience in operating the robot, classical music, dancing • RESULTS: children enjoyed, their cognitive performance were improved • CHALLENGE: adjustment of the robot’s behavior to the variability of the physical and mental abilities of the children Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    16. 16. Sketch Picture IL V
    17. 17. EXPERIMENT 5: COMPLEX INTERACTION • AIM: to test a constructive learning approach (using books and furniture), accompanied with motor and cognitive development • MOTIVATION: the robot is a “help-seeker”, natural environment • RESULT: “help-seeker” is efficient, single robot’s can not fit complex interaction • CHALLENGE: need for assortment of behaviors driven by the child’s personality Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    18. 18. VARIABILITY of REACTIONS Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012 E., 4 yrs, Hemiplegia, ADHD, GMFSC I M., 4 yrs, Spastic diplegia, ADHD, GMFCS II A., 6 yrs, Hemiplegia, GMFSC III D., 6 yrs, Spastic syndrome, ADHD, GMFSC I Fragment of long scenario. Goal: to induce arm rising to maximal range
    19. 19. THE SCHEME OF THE RAC CP FUN MODULES AND DATA FLOW Low-level Perception • Kinect: Motion processing • Robot’s Video: High color saturation filters Skin-color filters Edge detection Disparity computation • Robot’s Sensors: Data filtering Motor module • Visual-motor skills • Manipulation skills (reaching/ grasping) • Expressive skills (bodily/facial/vocalizations) Attention module • Attention on a child with fastest/slowest reactions • Attention on a child defined by physiotherapist Motivation module • Positive-negative reinforcement • Qualitive and quantative feedback • Empathy and mirroring effect Behavior module • Behavior selection • Decomposition to the set of operations: body movements, operational vocabulary, sounds, emotiona l expressions High-level Perception • Visual: Scene analysis and segmentation Face and eye detection Whole body labeling Subjects identification Gaze direction Emotional Recognition • Kinect: Extremities movement analysis • Sensory Data fusion Adaptation module • Adjustment to the stage of motor learning • Mood and current success level • Personality matching: hyperactive/passive Information analysis module • Subject’s motor behavior analysis • Subject’s cognitive behavior analysis • Monitoring of the level of interaction strength • Recognition of subjects attention state Input • Robot: Sensors data, including Scene video • Kinect: Movement tracking • Physiotherapist: Settings Personal and Anthropometric data Functional (pathological) restrictions Tasks difficulty Session scenario components Safety module • Avoid children in robot’s working space Databas e Self-awareness module • Error detection/Success measuring Locomotion, Falling, Manipulation • Robot localization Personal Information Pathology characteristics: GMFCS, Altered side, Assistive device Motor functions : Time of sit-stand initiation, Symmetry of holding arms Child-Robot Interaction Measurements: Emotional status, Responsiveness Environment: Place, # participants Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    20. 20. SUMMARY Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012 Unconstrained interaction Personal toy Social mediator Combined: competitive, entertaining, operated by a child Help-seeker Strategy for motivation Assortment of behaviors Taskcomplexity Variabilityofreactions Need
    21. 21. CONCLUSIONS ● RAC CP FUN is a feasible and promising new research area of social assistive technology with immeasurable potential ● RAC CP FUN may stimulate the development of new treatments for a wide variety of diseases and disorders through effective physiotherapy practice Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    22. 22. RESEARCH GROUP Dr. Mark BelokopytovDr. Simona Bar-Haim Bella DavidovGuy Keren Ronit Aviram MESHI Jerusalem Workshop on Motivational Aspects of Robotics in Physical Therapy, IROS 2012
    23. 23. IROS 2012 THANK YOU FOR ATTENTION

    ×