noah for cognitively impaired older adults: navigation and...
TRANSCRIPT
NOAH for Cognitively
Impaired Older Adults:
Navigation and Obstacle
Avoidance Help
Pooja Viswanathan (UBC)
James Little, Alan Mackworth, Alex Mihailidis
WiML Workshop - December 6, 2010 1
Outline
• Introduction
• Methods
• Experiments
• Future Work
• Relevance
2
Introduction
3
Motivation
• Proportion of older adults in the population continues to increase
• Of the 1.5 million people residing in nursing homes, 60-80% have been diagnosed with dementia, primarily Alzheimer‟s disease (Payne et al., 2002)
• Older adults with cognitive impairments not allowed to operate powered wheelchairs
• Prohibition of powered wheelchair use and the lack of strength required to use manual wheelchairs reduce mobility -> social isolation, depression and increased dependence on caregivers 4
Solution
1. Detects obstacles and prevents collisions
2. Infers the user's goal location/activity and
provides automated reminders
3. Provides navigation assistance using
prompts that account for the user‟s
cognitive state
Intelligent powered wheelchair for older adults with cognitive impairment that:
5
Overview
• Wheelchair is being developed for users with mild
to moderate cognitive impairment.
• User‟s schedule, wheelchair‟s current location,
obstacles in the map, and user preferences used to
plan optimal route.
• Type and level of prompting determined
automatically for each user using information
such as wheelchair heading, errors committed,
past responsiveness to system prompts.
• Wheelchair will be tested in a long-term-care
facility with cognitively-impaired older adults. 6
Control Strategy
• The wheelchair will stop upon detecting an
obstacle and prevent movement in the direction of
the obstacle.
• User will remain in control of all other
movements.
• Passive feedback provided in the form of
reminders and directions to help user navigate to
desired goals.
• Future work can involve a greater extent of
autonomous navigation for users with lower
cognitive capacity - legal and ethical issues such as
liability will need to be addressed. 7
Methods
8
System Overview
9
The system consists of:
Nimble Rocket TM Powered
Wheelchair
Bumblebee Stereovision Camera
from Point Grey Research
Fujitsu Lifebook P7120 Laptop
(under seat)
Developed at U of T and UBC
Collision Avoidance
• Elderly residents are unsteady on their feet
• Non-contact method of collision avoidance
needed to ensure safety
• Active sensors (laser, acoustic, sonar, etc.)
are often large, expensive, power-hungry,
unsafe, and prone to cross-talk issues.
• Infrared sensor used in Mihailidis et al.,
2007 produced false alarms in natural light
10
Collision Avoidance
(a) (b) (c)
Images of a person with a cane captured using the
stereovision camera: (a) original image, (b) depth image
(brighter pixels correspond to closer objects), and (c)
occupancy grid (black denotes obstacles, white denotes free
space, and the solid grey region denotes the area outside the
camera‟s field of view).
11
Collision Avoidance
• If object detected within a specified distance
threshold, wheelchair is stopped
• Compute direction around
obstacle with greatest
amount of free space
• Prompt: “Try turning
left”
12
Mapping and Localization
• Global map created using SLAM (laser
and/or vision used)
• Current location estimated by matching
visual landmarks in incoming stereo images
with previously detected landmarks
13
Map Annotation
• Viswanathan et al. (2009, 2010)
Curious
George 14
Path Planning
• Goal locations provided to the system in the
form of the user‟s daily schedule
• Goal location, combined with the
wheelchair‟s current location, and obstacles
in the map used to construct optimal path
Lounge
Kitchen
Lounge
Kitchen
Bedroom Bedroom
15
Prompting
Fulfill the following (possibly conflicting) goals
according to the following order of priority:
• Assist in successful navigation to the desired
location (issue correct prompts as needed)
• Minimize user frustration (minimize incorrect
and excessive prompting)
• Maximize user independence (minimize
caregiver intervention)
• Maximize user understanding (issue
appropriate level of prompts) 16
Prompting
• Using POMDP similar to Boger et al., 2005
and Hoey et al., 2007
User Model
(responsiveness,
independence etc.)
Lounge Bedroom
Kitchen
17
Experiments
18
Collision Avoidance
• Experiments conducted to test efficacy of
anti-collision and prompting system
• Conducted within controlled environment
19
Collision Avoidance
• Anti-collision systems tested with the
following commonly-found objects:
– A painted white wall with a flat finish
– A light green aluminium 4-wheeled walker
– A silver aluminium walking cane
– A person who was standing still
– A person who was moving
20
Collision Avoidance
21
- 96% accuracy in preventing collisions
- 0% false alarm rate
- 100% accuracy in prompting
Collision Avoidance
Scene views of a room with windows (a). Occupancy grids produced by
stereovision (b) and infrared (c) sensors with blinds closed and opened. 22
Map Annotation
23
Place recognition
24
Indoor images from
Google and Photobucket: Segmented object images
(from LabelMe) in real
home models:
Path Planning and Prompting
• Tested using Matlab interface to collect
wheelchair position data
• Scenarios
– Independent
– Not independent, responsive
– Not independent, not responsive
– Independent/Responsive with errors
– Not Independent/not responsive with flukes
25
Path Planning and Prompting
26
“on_left”
Path Planning and Prompting • Recent work:
– Real wheelchair position data acquired using
VSLAM
– Continuous path planner used for
generalization to more complex environments
(Alton et al. 2008)
– Clinical trials to test collision avoidance system
• Varying functional abilities
• Prompts not adhered to during collisions (errors)
• Blocking of motion was found to be frustrating –
other methods? (i.e. autonomous „correction‟) Other
non-joystick interfaces?
27
Future work
– Stopping frequency
– Independence and responsiveness dynamics
(distractions?)
– Prompt levels (detailed vs. general)
– Timing – how close to turn should you prompt?
– Challenges:
• building the user behavior model!
• inconsistent sensor performance
28
Relevance • Can restore mobility in older adults who are
currently not allowed to operate powered
wheelchairs.
• Safety feature can reduce the number of
wheelchair accidents and related injuries.
• Can enhance the health care system, reduce the
burden on care-giving staff, and improve the
quality of life of older adults with cognitive
disabilities.
• Provides a real-world application to test and
enhance AI, vision and robotics techniques. 29