There has been recent work on using the iPad to help children with autism. I wonder if the iPad could be used in conjunction with a robot – both as media for facilitating interaction. There's got to be a way to use the iPad as a pivot, just like we use the robot as a pivot. Stated another way, could we use an iPad app to scaffold a desired therapeutic interaction? I could certainly see using the iPad to allow the child to modulate a real robot or avatar.

Lanny's blog post about this topic

Interesting Note: During Apple's iPad 2 event on March 2, they specifically mentioned using the iPad to help children with autism as they were touting the iPad's success. It may be worthwhile to investigate more fully what is being done.

We have discussed using Troy's face as a way to indicate the state of the session to the therapists. For example, to indicate the “Playing with the ball” state, an image of a ball replaces Troy's eyes (for a few seconds). That way, the therapists know what state Troy is in and what sorts of actions are available. However, would changing Troy's face be a distraction for the children? Would it maybe pique their curiosity? What other methods can we use to help the the therapists know enough about Troy's state to keep the session under control?

I remember hearing an idea about Troy being able to recognize certain behavior patterns in children with autism and then performing an action based on that behavior. What if instead of just performing the action, Troy makes a “suggestion” to the therapist using haptic feedback? For example, Troy recognizes a pattern in the child which could be addressed using the “Playing with the ball” routine. Instead of just doing the routine, a signal is sent to the Wii remote so that it vibrates, indicating that Troy thinks it would be a good idea to use the ball routine now. The clinican could then choose to accept or reject that suggestion. If they accept, the routine is performed; otherwise it is just ignored. This could almost be an extra set of eyes for the clinician.

• Goodrich: On ethics (thoughts on readings from the book “Mistakes were made (but not by me)”)
• Fujiki: On transfer (from Scassellati's talk)
• Goodrich: On transfer (in response to Fujiki's post)
• Dan Ricks: On appearance (from Scassellati's talk)
• Jess Rose: Therapist interface - work accomplished and suggestions for the future.
• Alan Olsen: Thoughts on articles read for CS 598R
  • TiLAR alpha - state as of September 2009, and what is left to be done.

« Main Page