HUMAN-CENTERED Module3: Design Metaphors

ARTIFICIAL Chapter 11: Introduction: What

Are the Goals of AI Research?
INTELLIGENCE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter explores the primary goals of artificial intelligence (AI) research,
breaking them down into two main categories: science and innovation. The science
goal focuses on creating AI systems that mimic or surpass human perceptual,
cognitive, and motor abilities, often driven by the ambition to build intelligent,
autonomous systems. The innovation goal, on the other hand, prioritizes developing
AI technologies that enhance human capabilities, emphasizing transparency, human
control, and practical applications.
KEY THEMES AND
DEBATES IN AI
RESEARCH
Early AI Aspirations and the Turing Test
AI research initially sought to answer Alan Turing’s question, "Can machines
think?", leading to the development of systems aimed at passing the Turing
Test—where AI would be indistinguishable from a human in conversation.
Over time, AI research expanded to include areas like pattern recognition, natural
language processing, emotion recognition, and game-playing systems (e.g.,
chess, Go).
KEY THEMES AND
DEBATES IN AI
RESEARCH
Shift from Symbolic AI to Machine Learning
Early AI research focused on symbolic reasoning, but this approach gave way to
machine learning and deep learning techniques such as neural networks,
generative adversarial networks (GANs), and reinforcement learning.
These advances led to breakthroughs in areas like speech recognition, image
generation, and self-learning models.
KEY THEMES AND
DEBATES IN AI
RESEARCH
Criticism and Challenges
Some argue that AI systems remain brittle and unreliable in real-world applications.
Critics highlight AI’s failures in areas such as bias in language models, self-driving
car accidents, and failures in medical recommendations.
AI methods sometimes lose out to traditional engineering solutions, such as IBM’s
Deep Blue, which defeated Garry Kasparov using brute-force computation rather
than AI-style learning.
KEY THEMES AND
DEBATES IN AI
RESEARCH
Human-Centered AI (HCAI) and Explainability
AI research should integrate human-centered design with transparent algorithms, user
control, and audit trails for accountability.
Systems should be explainable and predictable, ensuring human oversight in critical
applications like healthcare, finance, and autonomous vehicles.
Finding a Middle Ground: Combined AI Designs
The book suggests four pairs of design strategies that blend automation and human
control, ensuring AI serves societal needs while maintaining safety and reliability.
Examples include self-driving car assist features (like lane-keeping and collision
avoidance), control panels for AI-driven automation, and AI-assisted search and
messaging services.
Ultimately, AI research must balance the science of autonomous intelligence with the
practical goal of enhancing human capabilities, fostering systems that are reliable, safe,
and beneficial.
HUMAN-CENTERED
ARTIFICIAL CHAPTER 12 Science and
Innovation Goals

INTELLIGENCE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter distinguishes between two fundamental goals in AI research:
the science goal (understanding and replicating human intelligence)
the innovation goal (using AI to enhance human capabilities).
While some researchers may identify with both goals, this distinction helps clarify
the different motivations and methodologies within AI development.
THE SCIENCE GOAL:
UNDERSTANDING AND
EMULATING HUMAN
INTELLIGENCE
The science goal focuses on studying and replicating human perceptual, cognitive,
and motor abilities in machines. This includes ambitions such as:
Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) – AI that can perform any intellectual task a
human can do.
Social robots – Machines that interact with humans in a human-like way.
Common-sense reasoning – AI that understands and applies everyday human logic.
Affective computing – AI that can recognize and respond to human emotions.
Researchers in this field aim to develop AI that can think and act like humans or
think and act rationally, as described in textbooks by Stuart Russell & Peter
Norvig and David Poole & Alan Mackworth.
 THE SCIENCE GOAL:
UNDERSTANDING AND
EMULATING HUMAN
INTELLIGENCE
Many AI scientists believe that humans are complex biological machines, so creating an
artificial human is a logical scientific pursuit. The AI 100 Report even suggests that the
difference between a human brain and a computer is only a matter of scale, speed,
autonomy, and generality rather than a fundamental distinction.
This belief drives efforts to build machines that learn like humans, requiring training and
development.
Science goal researchers often compare AI performance to human experts, such as AI
outperforming doctors in detecting cancer.
The media amplifies this competitive framing with headlines like “Robots Can Now Read
Better than Humans”.
Despite these advancements, some experts warn against overhyping AI capabilities. Gary
Marcus and Ernest Davis, in Rebooting AI, argue that the media makes AI seem closer to
human-like intelligence than it actually is, leading to misplaced public expectations.
 AUTONOMY VS. AUTOMATION
Automation – AI performs tasks based on pre-set instructions and data.
Autonomy – AI develops new goals and decisions independently, responding to new
information.
Many science goal researchers believe AI should move beyond automation and become
fully autonomous systems that can set their own objectives and monitor their own
actions. This leads to debates on whether AI should have moral and legal
responsibilities, similar to humans and corporations.
Some ethicists even suggest that future AI could have rights and ethical obligations,
but this remains a controversial topic. The book focuses on practical AI design rather
than theoretical discussions on AI morality.
•.

SCIENCE GOAL
•The science goal aims to understand and replicate human intelligence, with long-term
ambitions for AGI and autonomous AI.
•AI scientists often see humans as biological machines, making full emulation a realistic
goal.
•Media and hype can exaggerate AI’s progress, misleading the public.
•The shift from automation to autonomy raises ethical and legal questions about AI's
responsibility and rights
 THE INNOVATION GOAL IN AI

The innovation goal in AI focuses on developing practical, widely used products

and services that enhance human abilities. Sometimes called the engineering goal, it
prioritizes human-centered AI (HCAI), ensuring that AI serves as a supertool
rather than replacing human intelligence.
 THE INNOVATION GOAL:
AI AS A SUPERTOOL
Instead of striving to create autonomous human-like machines (as in the science
goal), innovation-focused AI aims to build tools that extend human capabilities.
These tools are often:
Embedded in technology such as cloud computing, websites, mobile devices,
home automation, manufacturing, and virtual assistants.
Designed for user convenience – instead of a humanoid airport robot, an
innovation-focused solution might be an airport app that provides maps, wait times,
and flight information.
 THE INNOVATION GOAL:
AI AS A SUPERTOOL
To develop such AI systems, researchers study human behavior and social
dynamics to ensure user acceptance and ease of use. This often involves:
Design thinking – focusing on user needs and behavior.
User testing and market research – refining AI products to make them intuitive
and beneficial.
Balancing automation and human control – allowing AI to assist in tasks without
removing human oversight.
 [Link] THINKING:
FOCUSING ON USER
NEEDS AND BEHAVIOR
What is Design Thinking?
Design thinking is a problem-solving approach that prioritizes human needs, emphasizing
empathy, experimentation, and iterative design. Instead of starting with technology, AI
developers begin by understanding user challenges and behaviors before creating
solutions.
Key Phases of Design Thinking in AI Development
Empathize – Understand users’ needs, frustrations, and behaviors.
Define – Identify the core problem AI should solve.
Ideate – Brainstorm possible AI-driven solutions.
Prototype – Build quick, testable versions of AI interfaces.
Test & Iterate – Refine AI systems based on user feedback.
 1. DESIGN THINKING:
FOCUSING ON USER
NEEDS AND BEHAVIOR
Example: AI-Powered Virtual Assistants
Instead of just focusing on speech recognition accuracy, design thinking ensures that AI
assistants like Siri, Alexa, and Google Assistant are intuitive and context-aware.
Developers study how people naturally speak and structure conversations to make
interactions more human-friendly.
AI assistants now understand follow-up questions and multiple requests in a single sentence.
Why it matters: AI should solve real user problems, not just showcase technological
advancements.
 2. USER TESTING AND
MARKET RESEARCH:
REFINING AI FOR
INTUITIVENESS AND
PRACTICAL
Once an AI concept is designed,BENEFITS
it must be tested with real users to ensure it is intuitive,
effective, and beneficial. This involves:
User Testing – Ensuring AI Works for People
What it is: Observing real users interact with AI to identify problems, confusion, or
usability gaps.
Methods:
✔ A/B Testing – Comparing two AI versions to see which performs better.
✔ Usability Testing – Asking users to complete tasks while analyzing their experience.
✔ Eye-Tracking Studies – Understanding how users visually navigate AI interfaces.
✔ Think-Aloud Testing – Users describe their thoughts while interacting with AI,
revealing confusion points.
2. USER TESTING AND MARKET
RESEARCH: REFINING AI FOR
INTUITIVENESS AND PRACTICAL
BENEFITS
Market Research – Understanding Real-World Adoption
What it is: Studying customer needs, preferences, and expectations to align AI products with
market demands.
Methods:
✔ Surveys & Interviews – Gathering opinions on AI usability and functionality.
✔ Competitor Analysis – Studying existing AI solutions to find improvement opportunities.
✔ Behavioral Data Analysis – Understanding how people interact with AI in real-world settings.
Example: AI-Powered Image Recognition (Google Photos & Apple Photos)
Early AI image tagging misclassified people and objects, leading to backlash.
User feedback led to better AI training and error correction.
Now, users can manually adjust AI-generated tags to improve future recommendations.
Why it matters: AI must continuously learn from real users to remain effective and relevant.
 3. BALANCING AUTOMATION
AND HUMAN CONTROL:
ENSURING AI ASSISTS
WITHOUT REPLACING
HUMANS
AI should enhance human decision-making, not take full control. Finding the right balance is critical to
avoiding over-reliance on AI while still benefiting from its efficiency.
Three Levels of AI Control & Automation
Full Human Control – AI provides insights, but humans make all decisions.
Examples:
Medical AI suggests diagnoses, but doctors make final treatment decisions.
AI-powered writing tools suggest edits, but users accept or reject them.
Shared Control – AI automates repetitive tasks but allows human intervention when needed.
Examples:
Self-driving car assist features (lane keeping, adaptive cruise control) help drivers but don’t take
full control.
AI in customer support handles simple queries but transfers complex issues to human agents.
 3. BALANCING AUTOMATION AND
HUMAN CONTROL: ENSURING AI
ASSISTS WITHOUT REPLACING
HUMANS
Full AI Automation (Only in Safe Scenarios) – AI handles tasks without human input, only where
failure has low consequences.
Examples:
Spam filters in email automatically remove junk messages.
AI in digital cameras automatically adjusts lighting and focus for better photos.
Example: AI in Healthcare
Full automation can be risky (e.g., an AI making a medical diagnosis without doctor verification).
Shared control is safer: AI assists in analyzing scans, but doctors validate the findings.
Why it matters: AI should empower humans, not take away control over critical decisions.
BALANCING AUTOMATION AND
HUMAN CONTROL
The HCAI framework emphasizes finding a balance between automation and user control:
Some applications require full automation, such as airbag deployment or pacemakers, where
instant responses are necessary.
Other applications demand full human control, such as bicycle riding or playing the piano.
Most AI applications lie in between, combining automation and human oversight to create safe,
reliable, and explainable systems.
To achieve this balance, AI engineers implement:
Interlocks to prevent human mistakes.
Controls to prevent AI failures.
Audit trails and logs to track system decisions and identify errors (useful in critical applications like
self-driving cars and medical devices).
1. INTERLOCKS – PREVENTING
HUMAN MISTAKES
What are interlocks?
Interlocks are fail-safe mechanisms designed to prevent humans from making errors when
interacting with AI systems. They act as safeguards to ensure users cannot accidentally trigger
unsafe or incorrect actions.
How do interlocks work?
They introduce checkpoints, warnings, or permissions before allowing critical actions.
Examples of Interlocks in AI Applications
Self-Driving Cars (Tesla, Waymo, etc.)
Require hands on the steering wheel at intervals to ensure drivers are still alert.
Issue audible and visual alerts if driver attention drops.
1. INTERLOCKS – PREVENTING
HUMAN MISTAKES
Healthcare AI (Medical Diagnosis Systems, Robotic Surgery)
Double-check confirmations before allowing an AI-suggested diagnosis or surgery step.
Require human approval before AI can administer medication.
Financial AI (Automated Trading Systems, Fraud Detection)
AI-based trading platforms include risk limits that prevent excessive losses.
Fraud detection AI flags suspicious transactions but requires human validation for blocking
accounts.
Why interlocks matter: They prevent users from making dangerous mistakes, ensuring AI
operates as an assistive tool, not an uncontrolled system.
 2. CONTROLS – PREVENTING AI
FAILURES
What are controls?
Controls are system-based safeguards that limit AI errors and prevent unintended
consequences.
How do controls work?
They restrict AI’s autonomy when high-stakes decisions are involved.
They provide override options so humans can correct or stop AI actions.
Examples of AI Controls in Different Industries
Self-Driving Cars (Waymo, Tesla, etc.)
AI may handle lane-keeping and braking, but human drivers can override and take full
control.
In emergencies, the car automatically slows down or pulls over instead of taking
unexpected actions.
 2. CONTROLS – PREVENTING AI
FAILURES

Medical AI (AI-Powered Diagnosis, Robotic Surgery)

AI-assisted cancer detection models highlight possible tumors, but doctors make the final call.
Surgical robots (e.g., Da Vinci Surgical System) allow human surgeons to remain in control,
rather than AI operating autonomously.
AI in Air Traffic Control (Flight Systems, Boeing & Airbus Autopilot)
AI helps adjust altitude and speed, but pilots can manually override AI when necessary.
AI detects weather risks and recommends alternate routes, but human pilots confirm the
decision.
Why controls matter: They prevent AI from acting unpredictably, ensuring humans can intervene
whenever necessary.
 3. AUDIT TRAILS & LOGS – TRACKING
AI DECISIONS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY

What are audit trails?

Audit trails are record-keeping mechanisms that track AI’s decisions, actions, and interactions over
time.
Why are they important?
Allow engineers to analyze past AI behavior and detect errors or biases.
Help regulators and companies investigate failures in high-risk applications.
Ensure AI remains accountable and transparent in its decision-making.
Examples of AI Audit Trails in Critical Applications
Self-Driving Cars (Accident Investigation & Safety Improvements)
AI logs sensor data, steering adjustments, and braking decisions in case of accidents.
If a Tesla crashes, investigators can review the AI’s decision-making process to determine fault.
 3. AUDIT TRAILS & LOGS – TRACKING
AI DECISIONS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY
Healthcare AI (Patient Safety & Compliance Monitoring)
AI-based medical imaging systems (e.g., IBM Watson Health, Google DeepMind) track how AI
arrived at a diagnosis.
If AI misdiagnoses a disease, logs help doctors understand why and improve future models.
AI in Financial Systems (Fraud Detection & Compliance)
Banks use AI to detect fraudulent transactions and record each flagged case.
AI audit logs help prevent bias in loan approvals and explain why customers were rejected.
Why audit trails matter: They provide transparency, accountability, and oversight, ensuring AI
remains trustworthy and fair.
INNOVATION GOAL
Innovation-focused AI solutions often start from scientific research and adapt it
into user-friendly commercial products. For example:
Speech recognition research led to virtual assistants like Siri, Alexa, and Google
Assistant.
Machine translation research powered services like Google Translate.
Image recognition AI enabled automatic alt-tags for accessibility in websites.
 MOVING BEYOND HUMAN-LIKE AI
Unlike science-focused AI, which often tries to mimic humans, innovation-driven AI prioritizes
function over form.
Instead of humanoid robots, engineers build specialized machines suited to specific tasks.
Rovers and drones perform rescue missions better than a bipedal robot.
Surgical “robots” are actually tele-operated tools for precision surgery.
This shift aligns with Lewis Mumford’s concept of avoiding animism in technology. He argued
that early attempts at new machines were often misguided by human and animal models. Instead,
more effective designs emerge when engineers focus on utility rather than imitating human forms.
Examples:
Four-wheeled vehicles outperform two-legged robots in transport.
Airplanes have wings, but they don’t flap like birds.
Exoskeletons and prosthetics enhance human abilities rather than mimicking biological
limbs exactly.
 AI IN SOCIAL AND
COLLABORATIVE
TECHNOLOGIES
Many innovation-focused AI solutions emphasize human connection and collaboration
rather than autonomy:
Google Docs and shared databases enable real-time teamwork.
Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Webex revolutionized remote work and education during
the COVID-19 pandemic.
Social media platforms connect billions of users but also raise concerns about privacy,
misinformation, and AI-driven manipulation.
These challenges highlight the need for human oversight in AI—combining AI’s
efficiency with human ethical responsibility.
 AI IN SOCIAL AND
COLLABORATIVE
TECHNOLOGIES

•The innovation goal focuses on AI as a supertool, helping humans rather than

replacing them.
•AI solutions should balance automation and human control, ensuring safety, reliability,
and usability.
•Functionality matters more than human-like design—robots and AI should be
optimized for their tasks rather than imitating humans.
•AI plays a critical role in collaboration and communication, enhancing teamwork,
education, and remote work.
•AI must be explainable and accountable, ensuring ethical and responsible
implementation.
 COMPARISON: SCIENCE GOAL
VS. INNOVATION GOAL IN AI
Science Goal (Understanding Innovation Goal
Aspect
Intelligence) (Human-Centered AI Tools)
Develop AI to enhance human capabilities
Objective Replicate or surpass human intelligence.
and productivity.
“How can AI assist and empower
Key Question “Can machines think like humans?”
humans?”
AI that mimics perception, cognition, and AI as supertools that improve human
Research Focus
motor abilities. decision-making and efficiency.
Long-term, fundamental research into Applied research & engineering to solve
Approach
AI’s cognitive functions. real-world problems.
- AI-powered recommendation systems
- Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - AI in healthcare (decision-support
Examples of AI - Common-sense reasoning tools)
Development - Emotionally aware AI - Smart assistants (Siri, Alexa, Google
- Fully autonomous robots Assistant)
- Self-driving car assist features
 COMPARISON: SCIENCE GOAL
VS. INNOVATION GOAL IN AI
Science Goal (Understanding Innovation Goal
Aspect
Intelligence) (Human-Centered AI Tools)
Automation vs. Prioritizes human oversight with AI
Focus on fully autonomous AI systems.
Human Control assistance.
AI as independent agents capable of
AI as supertools, designed to work under
Design Approach learning, reasoning, and making decisions
human control.
autonomously.
- Risk of AI autonomy without
- Need for transparent, explainable AI
explainability
Challenges & - Risk of over-reliance on AI in critical
- Ethical concerns over AI
Risks tasks
decision-making
- Balancing automation with user control
- Computational complexity
- Humanoid robots designed to assist in - AI-powered grammar checkers,
Real-World homes and workplaces recommendation systems, and medical
Example - AGI systems capable of learning any AI that assists doctors but doesn’t replace
HUMAN-CENTERED
ARTIFICIAL CHAPTER 13 Intelligent Agents
and Supertools

INTELLIGENCE
 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, we explore two powerful but different design metaphors for Artificial
Intelligence (AI) systems:
1. Intelligent Agents
2. Supertools
The chapter highlights the ongoing debate between these two approaches:
Should AI take control like an intelligent agent?
Or should it serve as a supertool that empowers the user?
Designers today often try to combine both approaches—using the smart capabilities of
intelligent agents inside systems, while keeping the interface user-centered and
controllable.
 THE “THINKING MACHINE”
MYTH

•As computers were developed in the 1940s, they were called “electronic brains”
or “awesome thinking machines.”
•This myth made people believe computers could do everything—even solve
complex human problems easily.
•But it also caused fear or resistance to using computers in workplaces because
people felt they might be too powerful or take over.
Key Point: These early descriptions raised unrealistic expectations and slowed
down acceptance of computers in society.
 TURING’S CHALLENGE: “CAN
MACHINES THINK?”

•In 1950, Alan Turing asked a famous question: Can machines think?
•He proposed the Turing Test—if a machine can have a conversation and fool a
human into thinking it's human, it's intelligent.
•Some people took this seriously and tried to create human-like machines, while
others saw it as a publicity stunt or just a game.
 DIFFERENT VIEWS ON AI
DESIGN:
A. Human-like Intelligent Agents
These are AIs designed to act like humans, often taking decisions on their own.
Examples include:
AI playing chess
Virtual assistants that manage tasks automatically
Robots in films like HAL (2001: A Space Odyssey), C3PO, The Terminator, and Her

Media and art often showed AI with human features, like heads, hands, or emotions, to
make them seem more relatable or powerful.
 A. HUMAN-LIKE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS
Definition:
These are AI systems designed to mimic human behavior, sometimes even emotions,
decision-making, and communication. The goal is to make them act, respond, or think like
humans — giving an illusion of intelligence or personality.
Features of Human-like Intelligent Agents:
Autonomous Decision-Making
They don’t just wait for instructions. Instead, they observe, learn, and decide what to do on
their own — just like a person might.
Emotion Simulation
Some intelligent agents are programmed to simulate emotions like empathy or frustration to
better interact with people. For example, a chatbot might "apologize" or sound excited.
Conversational Abilities
These agents can engage in natural language conversations, making them feel like you’re
talking to a real person.
 A. HUMAN-LIKE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS
Real and Fictional Examples:
Type Example Description
These agents analyze millions of moves
Games AI playing chess and pick the smartest one, simulating
human-level strategy.
Can respond, make decisions (e.g.,
Assistants Siri, Alexa, Google Assistant schedule meetings), and suggest things
automatically.
These AI characters show emotions,
HAL (2001: A Space Odyssey), relationships, and independent
Movies
C3PO (Star Wars), Her decision-making — sometimes even
questioning their own existence.
 A. HUMAN-LIKE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS
Visual Design Influence:
Media and artists often show AI with:
Human-like heads and eyes to appear intelligent
Hands or humanoid bodies relate to our own form
Emotional expressions to make them more "lifelike"
This human design makes people feel more connected to the machine — but it can also
create unrealistic expectations about what AI can actually do.
Why It Matters:
While these agents seem impressive and helpful, they also raise concerns:
Are they making ethical decisions?
Do users trust them too much?
Could they take away human jobs or control?
So, it's important to balance their powers with transparency and user control.
 B. SUPERTOOLS
Definition:
Supertools are AI systems designed to support and enhance human abilities, not replace
them. They act like powerful digital assistants — doing the heavy lifting (like
calculations, organizing, or data analysis), while humans remain in control of the
decisions and creativity.
Key Features of Supertools:
Human-Centered Design
Supertools are built with the goal of empowering people, not mimicking them. The user
is always in charge.
Support, Not Replace
They assist in tasks like planning, organizing, searching, and recommending — but they
don’t take over.
Transparency & Control
They are usually easy to understand, predictable, and customizable by the user.
B. SUPERTOOLS
Examples of Supertools

Tool Type Example How It Helps

Grammarly, Google Docs Suggests corrections, but user
Writing Assistant
suggestions decides what to accept.
Recommends best route, but you
Navigation Google Maps, Waze
choose where to go.
Lets you filter and sort — you
E-commerce Filters Online shopping platforms
stay in control of choices.
Automate calculations or create
Data Tools Excel, Tableau, data visualizers
charts, but you interpret the data.
Auto-focus or lighting help, but
Smart Cameras Phone cameras with AI
you still frame the shot.
 B. SUPERTOOLS
Expert View:
Daniela Rus (MIT CSAIL):
“AI is nothing more than a tool... [with] huge power to empower us.”
She believes that AI should serve people, not act like them.

Why Supertools Are Important:

They respect human decision-making — you’re the boss.
They work with people, not over them.
They make complex tasks easier — like analyzing huge data sets or finding patterns.
They improve accessibility, helping people with disabilities use tech more
independently.
Supertools are like digital power-ups.
They don’t try to be human.
They make you better at being human.
 DIFFERENCE OF IA AND
SUPERTOOLS
Supertools Intelligent Agents
Systems that act independently or on behalf of the
Tools that help and enhance human abilities
user
Give full control to the user Try to predict and act for the user
Example: Virtual assistant that books a flight or
Example: Sliders, checkboxes, visual dashboards
Supertools
Intelligent
recommends news
Agents

Values: Clarity, consistency, user choice Values: Automation, initiative, personalization

Level of automation is low to moderate Level of automation is high
 IA & SUPERTOOLS
How the Debate Evolved
•In 1968, Douglas Engelbart demonstrated how computers could augment human
intelligence, not replace it.
•In the 1990s, a debate took place between:
•Ben Shneiderman (supporting supertools)
•Pattie Maes (supporting intelligent software agents)
•Shneiderman believed in giving users control via interactive tools.
•Maes believed that software could learn and take initiative based on user preferences.
This debate still continues today: Should AI do things for us, or with us?
 IA & SUPERTOOLS
What’s Happening Today?
•Despite AI advancements, most apps today are supertools.
•Examples: GPS apps, social media filters, search engines
•These tools use AI internally, but users still control the experience.
•Many popular apps follow design guidelines that emphasize:
•User control (users make decisions)
•Flexibility (users choose how to use features)
Even powerful AI features like autofocus or face detection in smartphone cameras still
let you decide how to take the photo.
 IA & SUPERTOOLS

Why Supertools Matter (Especially for Accessibility)

•A blind woman on a flight using her laptop with screen-reader software shows
how well-designed supertools:
•Empower people with disabilities
•Allow independent professional work
•Are based on accessibility guidelines
User control = Inclusion + Empowerment
 CAN WE COMBINE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS +
SUPERTOOLS?
Instead of choosing either full automation (Intelligent Agents) or only user
control (Supertools), many modern systems combine the best of both. This
hybrid approach keeps users empowered while using AI to assist smartly in the
background.
There are 3 ways to do that:
1: AI Inside, User in Control
2: Smart Automation with Manual Options
3: Coaching & Recommendations
 CAN WE COMBINE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS +
SUPERTOOLS?
Option 1: AI Inside, User in Control
•How it works: The AI operates quietly in the background, offering helpful support
— but you decide what to do.
•Examples:
•Spellcheck or grammar tools (like Grammarly): The AI suggests corrections, but
you choose whether to apply them.
•Search engines: Google auto-suggests search terms, but you pick the final query.
•Why it works well:
•Keeps the user in charge
•Reduces errors and saves time
•No surprise actions by the system
Best for: Tasks where accuracy and user judgment are important — like writing,
searching, or editing.
 CAN WE COMBINE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS +
SUPERTOOLS?
Option 2: Smart Automation with Manual Options
•How it works: AI automates technical aspects, while the user controls creative or
personal choices.
•Example: Smartphone Cameras
•AI adjusts brightness, contrast, and focus automatically
•You decide the angle, use filters, or choose what to share
•Other uses:
•Video editors that auto-stabilize shaky footage but let you crop and cut
•Smart thermostats that suggest temperatures but allow manual overrides
Why it works well:
•Saves effort on routine things
•Empowers users with creative control
•Offers a balance of efficiency and flexibility
 CAN WE COMBINE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS +
SUPERTOOLS?
Option 3: Coaching & Recommendations
•How it works: AI offers advice or suggestions, but never takes over.
•Examples:
•Spotify or Netflix: Recommends music or shows based on your taste, but you’re
always free to ignore or explore more
•Fitness or learning apps: Give feedback on your performance (e.g., yoga pose,
piano rhythm) after you’ve done the task
•Why it works well:
•Encourages self-improvement
•Keeps the user motivated without pressure
•Makes AI feel like a partner, not a boss
Best for: Personal growth, creativity, or lifestyle — where supportive suggestions
matter more than automation.
CAN WE COMBINE
INTELLIGENT AGENTS +
SUPERTOOLS?
Option 1: AI Option 2: Smart Option 3: Coaching &
Feature
Inside Automation Recommendations
User
Full Partial (creative) Full
Control
Handles technical Gives suggestions and
AI Role Background helper
parts feedback
Spellcheck, Camera apps, Smart Spotify, Yoga apps,
Examples
Search appliances Learning coaches
Main Saves time, Eases tasks, retains Encourages growth,
Benefit keeps control personalization supports learning
HUMAN-CENTERED
ARTIFICIAL CHAPTER 14 Teammates and
Telebots

INTELLIGENCE
 INTRODUCTION
The Popular Belief: "Robots Should Be Like Humans"
•Many designers assume that human–human interaction is the best model for
designing human–robot interaction.
•This means building robots to talk, behave, and emote like people — as if they are our
teammates or friends.
•Examples include humanoid robots in movies (like C3PO or Her) and real-life virtual
assistants that respond socially.
Why? Because studies (like those by Clifford Nass at Stanford) showed that people
naturally respond to robots socially when they seem human.
 THE PROBLEM: HUMAN-LIKE
ROBOTS CAN MISLEAD US
1. Unrealistic Expectations
When a robot looks or talks like a human, people start to believe it can:
Think like a human
Make good decisions in tough situations
Take responsibility for its actions
But the truth is:
Robots only follow predefined rules or algorithms
They don’t truly understand context, emotions, or consequences
They cannot be held morally or legally accountable
For example: A military drone or surgical robot might seem “smart,” but if something
goes wrong, it’s the human operator who is responsible, not the machine.
 THE PROBLEM: HUMAN-LIKE
ROBOTS CAN MISLEAD US
2. Emotional Attachment
Humans are wired to bond emotionally — even with machines:
People may trust robots too much, expecting them to help in emergencies
They might treat them like friends, even though the robot doesn’t understand or care
This emotional bond can be dangerous if:
Users become over-reliant
They ignore flaws or risks in the robot’s performance
Example: A child might feel safe with a robot toy and confide in it, unaware that the toy
can’t protect or respond appropriately.
 THE PROBLEM: HUMAN-LIKE
ROBOTS CAN MISLEAD US
3. Disappointment & Frustration
When robots fail to act like real teammates, users often feel:
Frustrated ("Why didn’t it do what I expected?")
Betrayed ("I trusted it to help me!")
Let down when the robot doesn’t respond like a human would
This is especially problematic in critical situations like:
Emergency response
Medical procedures
Mental health support
 THE PROBLEM: HUMAN-LIKE
ROBOTS CAN MISLEAD US
What Nass & Groom Discovered
Even Clifford Nass, one of the original supporters of social robots, later changed his
view. He and his student Victoria Groom wrote:
“Robots fail as teammates.”
They explained:
•Calling robots "teammates" sets users up for failure
•It's better to design robots as helpful tools, not as partners
 WHY ROBOTS ARE NOT
TEAMMATES
Robots are not responsible: They can’t be blamed or held accountable for
mistakes—humans always remain in control.
Robots aren’t creative: They don’t have intuition, emotion, or original thought like
humans do.
Robots have different strengths: Superhuman sensors, huge data handling, and
algorithmic power should be leveraged instead of making them act human.
 WHY ROBOTS ARE NOT
1. TEAMMATES
Robots Are Not Responsible
Humans are always responsible for what robots do — legally, ethically, and morally.
If a robot makes a mistake (like in surgery or during a military mission), it’s not the
robot that gets blamed — it's the designer, operator, or company behind it.
Robots don’t understand consequences or morality. They just follow commands or
algorithms.
Example:
If a drone accidentally hits the wrong target, it’s not “the drone’s fault.” The human who
operated or programmed it is accountable.
Treating robots like teammates can blur the lines of responsibility, which is dangerous
in critical fields like healthcare, aviation, and defense
 WHY ROBOTS ARE NOT
TEAMMATES
2. Robots Are Not Creative
Robots can generate content using data and rules (like writing code, generating music,
or creating images), but they lack emotion, intuition, and originality.
Creativity involves empathy, life experience, curiosity, emotion, and sometimes even
risk — things robots simply don’t have.
When humans create, they’re drawing from context, culture, and imagination —
robots are drawing from a database.
Example:
A musician composes a song about heartbreak using real emotion. A robot might mimic
that, but it doesn't feel or understand love or pain.
Robots can assist creative processes, but the spark of creativity is uniquely human
 WHY ROBOTS ARE NOT
3. TEAMMATES
Robots Have Different, Superhuman Strengths
Instead of pretending to be human, robots should play to their actual strengths, which are very
different from ours:
Robot Superpowers:
Massive data processing – They can analyze millions of records in seconds.
Superhuman sensors – Can detect heat, chemicals, or movement humans can't.
Advanced algorithms – Can spot patterns in data that humans would miss.
Information-rich displays – Show complex results in clear, structured ways (like medical scans or
stock market dashboards).
Example:
A rescue robot doesn’t need to “talk” like a teammate. It just needs to detect gas leaks, navigate
dangerous environments, and transmit video to human rescuers faster and better than any person
could.
Robots shine when they amplify our capabilities, not when they try to copy them.
 WHY THE "TEAMMATE"
METAPHOR FALLS SHORT:
Emotional Attachment Creates Misunderstandings:
When robots appear human-like, users may form emotional bonds, which can lead to:
Misuse of robots
Unrealistic expectations (assuming robots can "understand" or make moral decisions)
Misjudgments about what robots can safely or appropriately do
Robots Are Not People:
Responsibility: Robots cannot be legally or morally accountable. They don’t make ethical
decisions or take responsibility for mistakes. That remains a human duty.
Examples: Fighter pilots, astronauts, and drone operators all want and maintain control.
They use automation, but don’t treat machines as partners—they treat them as tools.
WHY THE "TEAMMATE"
METAPHOR FALLS SHORT:
Designing Human-like Robots Ignores Computer Strengths:
Computers excel at things humans can’t do:
Processing huge datasets
Using superhuman sensors
Displaying vast amounts of data visually
Performing precise, repetitive tasks
When designers try to mimic humans, they often sacrifice these strengths. For
instance, sending text messages to describe a robot’s view instead of using
high-resolution images is inefficient.
A BETTER ALTERNATIVE:
TELE-BOTS AND SUPERTOOLS
Instead of making robots act like people (with faces, voices, or “feelings”), a growing
number of experts suggest a more practical and honest approach:
Design robots as tools — not as partners or teammates.
These tools fall into two categories:
Tele-bots – robots that humans operate remotely
Supertools – robots or systems that extend human abilities through advanced
technology
 WHAT ARE TELE-BOTS?
Tele-bots (short for teleoperated robots) are machines that:
Are controlled by humans, often from a distance
May include automated features (like navigation or stabilization)
Are clearly tools, not partners
These robots extend the human body — giving people superhuman precision, strength, or
reach — without pretending to think or feel.
Key Features of Tele-bots:
Remote human control (with partial autonomy)
No emotion or personality
Enhanced capabilities, like better precision or access to hard-to-reach places
Clear responsibility — humans make the decisions
 REAL-LIFE EXAMPLES OF
TELE-BOTS:
Da Vinci Surgical Robot
A surgeon controls robotic arms using a console.
The robot makes precise movements, more accurate than human hands alone.
It doesn’t make decisions — it just amplifies the surgeon’s skill.
 REAL-LIFE EXAMPLES OF
TELE-BOTS:
NASA Mars Rovers (like Curiosity or Perseverance)
Operated by teams on Earth, sending commands across millions of kilometers.
The rover uses autonomous navigation to avoid obstacles but doesn’t make high-level
decisions.
It’s a tool for exploration, not a robotic astronaut.
Military or Commercial Drones
Controlled by trained pilots from a distance.
May use automated features like GPS-based hovering or return-to-home functions.
The pilot remains fully responsible for every major action.
 WHAT ARE SUPERTOOLS?
Supertools are advanced machines or software systems that:
• Perform functions beyond human ability
• Don’t try to be social or emotional
• Support human decision-making
They are designed to process data, provide insights, or manipulate the physical world
with precision.
Key Features of Supertools:
• Superhuman abilities (vision, memory, speed, etc.)
• No emotional deception
• Highly efficient and specialized
• Used to empower human users
 REAL-LIFE EXAMPLES OF
SUPERTOOLS
Bloomberg Terminal (Finance)
Delivers real-time data, stock prices, and financial analysis.
Used by investors and traders to make fast, informed decisions.
It’s not a “teammate” — it’s a powerful tool that enhances human judgment.
AI-Powered Medical Imaging Tools
AI scans X-rays or MRIs faster than doctors and highlights possible abnormalities.
It doesn’t make diagnoses — it assists the doctor by drawing attention to key areas.
AI in Industrial Automation
Analyzes machine performance in factories and predicts when a part might fail.
Helps humans act early to prevent breakdowns — it doesn’t replace the engineer.
WHY THE “SUPERTOOL”
APPROACH WORKS BETTER
Designing robots to be helpful tools—not pretend humans—has three big advantages:

1. Clarity – Everyone Knows What the Robot Can Do

When robots look or act like people, it’s easy to get confused.
You might think:
"Can this robot understand me?"
"Does it care about my feelings?"
"Will it take responsibility if something goes wrong?"
But with tele-bots or supertools, there’s no confusion.
People understand the robot is just a machine.
Example:
A surgical robot doesn’t pretend to be a doctor. It’s a tool the doctor uses.
You know it doesn’t think or feel—it just moves exactly how the doctor tells it to.
WHY THE “SUPERTOOL”
APPROACH WORKS BETTER
Designing robots to be helpful tools—not pretend humans—has three big advantages:
2. Control – Humans Stay in Charge
In this approach, people make all the important decisions.
The robot doesn’t act like a teammate or take over tasks unless told to.
There’s no illusion that the robot is “smart” or “thinking for itself.”
Example:
A drone might fly on its own a bit (hover, avoid obstacles),
but a person tells it where to go and what to do.
This avoids dangerous situations where people trust the robot too much or assume it
will “figure it out.”
WHY THE “SUPERTOOL”
APPROACH WORKS BETTER
Designing robots to be helpful tools—not pretend humans—has three big advantages:
3. Efficiency – Machines Do What They’re Good At
Robots aren’t good at being human.
But they are great at things like:
Calculating numbers fast
Scanning large areas quickly (like crops or warehouses)
Navigating with sensors (like self-driving carts)
Lifting heavy objects precisely
Processing big chunks of information fast (like weather data or stock markets)
Example:
A Bloomberg Terminal gives real-time data to stock traders—it’s super fast and accurate.
It doesn’t talk or act friendly—but it helps humans make better decisions.
HUMAN-CENTERED
ARTIFICIAL CHAPTER 15 Assured
Automomy and Control centers

INTELLIGENCE
 WHAT IS "COMPUTER
AUTONOMY"?
Autonomy means a computer or robot can make decisions on its own without needing a
human to control every move.
Autonomous System: Acts independently
Automated System: Follows fixed rules with no flexibility
For example:
A washing machine that just follows a set program is automated.
A self-driving car that makes decisions based on traffic and weather is autonomous.
Autonomy can be risky without the right human oversight.
 WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH
FULL AUTONOMY?
While full autonomy sounds cool, real-world examples show serious risks:
Real Incidents:
Stock Market crashes caused by autonomous trading bots
Friendly fire (Patriot missile hit friendly planes)
Tesla crash (2016) when autopilot failed
Boeing 737 MAX crashes due to a system taking over without telling pilots
 WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH
FULL AUTONOMY?
While full autonomy sounds cool, real-world examples show serious risks:
Common Issues:
Humans must still watch and monitor autonomous systems.
When something goes wrong, humans are blamed, even if they didn’t know what the
machine was doing.
It's hard for people to take control quickly if the system fails.
Operators can lose important skills if they don’t use them often (this is called "deskilling").
 DEADLY MYTHS OF AUTONOMY
Myth 1: "Robots are smart enough to manage everything on their own."
What people wrongly believe:
“The robot is super intelligent—it can handle everything without me.”
Reality:
•Most robots are good at specific tasks (like navigating, scanning, lifting).
•But they don’t understand context, emotions, or changing environments well.
•If something unexpected happens, they often fail or freeze.
Example:
A robot vacuum might clean floors well, but if it encounters a sock, it gets stuck. It
doesn’t "know" it should remove the sock and continue.
 DEADLY MYTHS OF AUTONOMY
Myth 2: "The robot knows what it’s doing, and it doesn’t need human input."
What people wrongly believe:
“Once I set it up, the robot will figure everything out on its own.”
Reality:
•Robots follow instructions—they don’t have real understanding.
•They can’t handle every situation unless a human helps or guides them.
•Even "self-learning" systems need human training data and corrections.
Example:
A delivery drone may know how to fly, but if there's a sudden storm or no GPS signal, it
won't know what to do unless a human steps in.
 DEADLY MYTHS OF AUTONOMY
Myth 3: "I can trust a robot even if it can’t explain what it’s doing."
What people wrongly believe:
“It’s working fine—I don’t need to know how or why.”
Reality:
•If a robot makes a mistake and you don't know what it did or why it did it, it becomes
dangerous.
•Machines must be transparent—able to show their actions and reasons.
•You can’t fix a problem you don’t understand.
Famous Quote:
“There’s nothing worse than a smart machine that can’t tell you what it’s doing or when it
will finish.”
Example:
Imagine a robot arm in a factory suddenly stops. If it can’t tell you why it stopped or when it
will resume, it slows production and creates confusion.
 BETTER IDEA: ASSURED AUTONOMY
WITH HUMAN SUPERVISION
What is Assured Autonomy?
It’s a safer approach where:
Systems do some things automatically
But humans watch, control, and can step in anytime
It’s based on:
Transparency: We know what the machine is doing
Predictability: We know how it will behave
Control: We can take over when needed
 SOLUTION: CONTROL CENTERS &
SUPERVISED AUTONOMY
Rather than full independence, we build Control Centers where:
People monitor the autonomous systems
There are control panels with clear information
Systems send alerts and feedback
Actions are tracked (audit trails) to review what happened later
Example Systems Using Control Centers:
Air traffic control: Pilots + local towers + national centers
Hospitals: ICUs with monitors and human oversight
Trains and power plants: Automated tools, but human operators supervise
Self-driving cars (MIT Parallel Autonomy): Humans drive, but computers stop crashes
 SUPERVISED AUTONOMY IN
EVERYDAY LIFE

Your car’s automatic transmission – it changes gears by itself but doesn’t take over
driving.
E-commerce websites – you click “buy,” and the system handles delivery, but you’re
always in charge.
Social media – it suggests content but doesn't post for you.
These systems are autonomous in parts, but you, the human, make the real decisions.
HUMAN-CENTERED
ARTIFICIAL Chapter 16: Social Robots and
Active Appliances

INTELLIGENCE
INTRODUCTION
Social Robots (also called humanoid, anthropomorphic, or android):
These are robots designed to look and act like humans.
They may have:
Human-like faces, arms, or voices
The ability to talk, walk, or show emotions
Example: A robot that looks like a person and talks to you
Active Appliances:
These are smart machines you use every day at home or work — they don’t look
human, but they do helpful things.
Examples:
Kitchen stoves, dishwashers, and coffee makers
Washing machines, baby monitors, HVAC (heating and cooling) systems
Lawn-watering systems, robot vacuum cleaners, and pool-cleaning robots
A BRIEF HISTORY OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
Ancient Inspirations to 1700s Inventions
The idea of robots that look and act like humans goes back to ancient Greece.
In the 1770s, a Swiss watchmaker named Pierre Jaquet-Droz built mechanical
human-like machines:
The Writer: used a quill pen to write
The Musician: played a piano
The Draughtsman: drew pictures
These robots had faces, limbs, and clothes, but they were mainly museum pieces
later.
In contrast, inventions like printing presses, clocks, and music boxes became widely
useful and successful.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
Famous Robot-Like Characters in Stories
Stories also shaped how we imagine human-like machines:
The Golem: a clay figure brought to life by a 16th-century rabbi in Prague.
Frankenstein (1818): a human created by science, written by Mary Shelley.
Pinocchio: a wooden puppet who becomes a real boy.
Tootle the Train: a train with a personality who breaks the rules.
The Sorcerer’s Apprentice (by Goethe): a magical broomstick goes out of control
when the apprentice can’t stop it from carrying water.
 A BRIEF HISTORY OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
The Modern Social Robot Idea
The term "robot" became popular after the 1920 play Rossum’s Universal Robots by Karel Čapek.
Since then, the idea of social robots has grown — robots that:
Have human-like features (arms, legs, face)
Can show facial expressions, speak, and move
Try to seem like they have emotions or a personality.
•Social robots are exciting and fun — they’re popular in:
•Movies (like WALL-E or R2-D2)
•Toys
•DIY robot kits
While they’re great for entertainment, building real-life useful robots with those human-like
features is still very hard.
crash test dummies or medical mannequins, are used successfully in real-world applications
today.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
Crash Test Dummies
What are they?
Life-sized models of the human body used in car crash simulations.
Purpose:
To test vehicle safety — like how seatbelts, airbags, and car frames protect passengers
during a crash.
Features:
Built with sensors to measure force, impact, and movement.
Simulate different body sizes (adults, children, even pregnant women).
Help car makers design safer vehicles.
They are not robots — they don’t move on their own or interact.
They’re scientific tools designed to mimic how the human body reacts in accidents.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
Medical Mannequins (or Medical Simulators)
What are they?
Realistic human-like models used for medical training.
Purpose:
Help doctors, nurses, and students practice procedures like CPR, surgery, childbirth, and
injections without risking real patients.
Features:
Some have breathing, heartbeats, and speech simulated by machines.
Can “bleed” or show symptoms of illness.
Used in hospitals, nursing schools, and emergency training centers.
They can be low-tech or high-tech.
The most advanced ones are robotic mannequins with sensors and computer control.
WHY HUMAN-LIKE ROBOT DESIGNS
CAN BE MISLEADING
1. Robot Arms – Learning from Mistakes
Early robot arms copied the human arm: about 16 inches long, with five fingers and a
wrist.
But they were weak — they could only lift 20 pounds.
Later, engineers moved away from human-like design and made arms with more joints,
greater flexibility, and the ability to lift heavy loads.
This shift showed that copying humans isn't always effective — better to design based on
the task, not human shape.
WHY HUMAN-LIKE ROBOT DESIGNS
CAN BE MISLEADING
2. Failed Social Robot Projects
Many companies tried to make robots that looked or acted like humans — and failed:
Postal Buddy (1993): A talking robot for US post offices. Shut down after customers
disliked it.
Tillie the Teller: An anthropomorphic bank teller. Also rejected by customers.
Microsoft BOB (1995): Cute onscreen characters to help users — shut down in a year.
Clippy (Office 1997): The helpful paperclip — more annoying than useful.
Ananova (2000): A talking newsreader avatar — ended quickly.
WHY HUMAN-LIKE ROBOT DESIGNS
CAN BE MISLEADING
3. Popular but Not Profitable
Some high-profile robots drew attention but didn't become products:
Asimo by Honda: a human-like robot with walking and talking abilities. Project ended in
2018.
Sophia by Hanson Robotics: Gained media fame and even Saudi Arabian citizenship,
but didn’t lead to widespread commercial success.
Jibo (by Cynthia Breazeal), Cozmo, and Kuri: charming social robots — but their
companies closed in 2019.
WHY HUMAN-LIKE ROBOT DESIGNS
CAN BE MISLEADING
4. Reasons for Failure
Many human-like robots are:
Too complex to build and maintain.
Unrealistic: They raise high expectations they can’t meet.
Annoying or even creepy to interact with.
Less useful than simple machines that just do their job quietly (e.g., vending machines).
WHY HUMAN-LIKE ROBOT DESIGNS
CAN BE MISLEADING
5. Some Success Stories
Not all attempts failed. A few social robots found some success:
Pepper (Softbank): Friendly robot used in stores and events. Over 20,000 sold, but production
stopped in 2021.
NAO Robot: Smaller and smarter than Pepper, used in education, healthcare, and retail.
Boston Dynamics: Switched from human-like robots to efficient machines that move boxes in
warehouses. Hyundai bought them in 2020.
6. Special Use Cases
Autism therapy: Some studies show children with autism respond well to robots.
Robots can be less overwhelming than people.
But critics warn that relying too much on robots can lead to short-term gains but no long-term
improvement.
Play therapy with robotic dolls might be a middle ground.
WHY HUMAN-LIKE ROBOT DESIGNS
CAN BE MISLEADING
7. Ethical Concerns
Experts warn that pretending robots are human can:
Mislead people emotionally.
Raise expectations that the robot can understand or care like a human.
Remove accountability when decisions are made by machines in sensitive situations
(e.g., law, healthcare).
[Link]
ANIMAL ROBOT
What Are Animal Robots?
Animal robots are robotic devices designed to look and behave like animals—such as
dogs, cats, or seals. They often act as companions and are especially developed for
emotional support, therapy, education, or entertainment.
Why Use Animal Robots Instead of Human-like Robots?
Human-like robots (social robots) often feel unsettling or unnatural to people.
Animal robots, on the other hand, are seen as cute, non-threatening, and emotionally
comforting, especially for:
Older adults with dementia or loneliness
Children
Therapy patients
POPULAR EXAMPLES OF ANIMAL
ROBOTS

PARO (Seal Robot)

Looks like a white baby harp seal with soft fur.
Responds to touch, light, sound, and temperature.
Moves its head and legs, makes noises, and acts as if it's alive.
FDA-approved medical device for therapy.
Patients describe it as a buddy or a conversation starter.
POPULAR EXAMPLES OF ANIMAL
ROBOTS
2. AIBO (Sony Dog Robot)
First launched in 1999, updated version in 2018.
Has expressive eyes, can form “friendships” with other
AIBOs.
Some owners in Japan even held Buddhist funerals when
their robots stopped working.
High-tech and expensive (~$2900).
POPULAR EXAMPLES OF ANIMAL
ROBOTS

3. Joy for All (Hasbro Robot Pets)

Designed for older adults with dementia.
Affordable (~$129) compared to AIBO.
Soft, cuddly dogs and cats that bark/meow, respond
to touch, and have a heartbeat.
More than half a million units sold.
POPULAR EXAMPLES OF ANIMAL
ROBOTS

Tombot
Created for people with dementia.
Designed by Jim Henson’s Creature Shop.
Moves head, ears, tail; responds to touch and voice.
Priced around $400, built for realistic
companionship.
 POPULAR EXAMPLES OF ANIMAL
ROBOTS

5. Fisca Robot Dog

•Budget-friendly (~$60), programmable robot.
•Has remote control to make it move, play music,
shake head, etc.
•Fun but lacks emotional depth or cuddly features.

.
POPULAR EXAMPLES OF ANIMAL
ROBOTS
6. Spot (Boston Dynamics)
•A $70,000 robot dog with advanced walking/running/climbing capabilities.
•Used for security, military, and industrial purposes.
•Not safe for close interaction with people—not meant for companionship.
ACTIVE APPLIANCES
Active appliances are smart devices designed to perform everyday household tasks
automatically or semi-automatically. They are not designed to look like humans or
animals, and usually don’t move around, but they use artificial intelligence (AI) or
automation to assist with chores.
Examples of Active Appliances
Google Nest Thermostat: Learns your temperature preferences and automatically
adjusts settings.
Robot vacuum cleaners (like Roomba): Clean floors without human help.
Smart washing machines & dryers: Automatically adjust cycles based on load.
Security cameras: Detect movement, recognize faces, and send alerts.
Smart ovens and refrigerators: Help with cooking, energy saving, or food tracking.
Exercise equipment (like Peloton): Offers interactive, AI-supported workouts.
ACTIVE APPLIANCES
How Are They “Smart” or “Active”?
These appliances use:
Sensors to detect environment (e.g., temperature, movement).
Machine learning to learn your habits (e.g., when you raise the heat).
Connectivity to interact with apps and users (via phone, Wi-Fi).
Automation to take action without constant human control.
How Are They Different From Other Robots?
Type Looks Like Moves Around Purpose Intelligence
Communication,
Social Robots Human-like Sometimes High
companionship
Pet-like (dog,
Animal Robots Yes Comfort, therapy Moderate
cat, seal)
Active
Device/machine No Chores, tasks Functional AI
Appliances
ACTIVE APPLIANCES IN THE HOME
The author talks about seven smart appliances in their kitchen that:
Use sensors to detect activity.
Can be manually started or automatically activated (e.g., by preset time or
sensor input).
Use AI to:
Save energy
Recognize users
Improve home security
Support voice control (e.g., Alexa, Google Assistant)
ACTIVE APPLIANCES IN THE HOME
Current Challenges in Design
Even though smart appliances are helpful, their user interface design is often
frustrating:
Inconsistency: Devices from the same company can have different ways to set time
or date.
Daylight saving time changes aren’t handled automatically.
Timers and displays (like oven or coffee maker) are different for each appliance.
Lack of standardization makes learning and using devices harder.
Suggestion: Allow control from a single mobile app or laptop, so users can manage
everything—even when away from home.
ACTIVE APPLIANCES FOR HEALTH
AND FITNESS
Other home-based smart devices include:
Medical tools: thermometer, BP monitor, glucose monitor, etc.
Fitness equipment: treadmills, bikes, rowers, often labeled “AI-powered” because
they personalize workouts.
Problems:
Each has a different interface and display.
No central tracking system for health data.
Hard for users to keep long-term health records manually.
Ideal solution: Consistent interfaces, automatic data recording, and the ability to
share data with doctors for better treatment.
ACTIVE APPLIANCES
The Roomba: A Success Story in Active Appliances
The Roomba by iRobot is a robotic vacuum cleaner with:
Mobility
Sensors to avoid obstacles and detect when rooms are empty
Smartphone control and scheduling
Automatic docking for recharging and emptying dirt
Floor mapping to show where it cleaned, and lets you name rooms (e.g., “hallway”)
New versions give users better control and more feedback (like cleaning history and room
maps).
ACTIVE APPLIANCES
Growing Complexity = Growing Need for Better Feedback
As active appliances become more advanced:
Users need better control panels, history tracking, and performance feedback.
Research shows users get frustrated when:
They don’t know why a device failed.
There’s no way to fix or understand the problem.
Studies suggest:
Devices should report errors clearly (on-screen, voice message, app alert).
Standard failure reporting can help manufacturers improve faster.
Even customer reviews can reveal common issues and help future designs.
ACTIVE APPLIANCES
Future Potential: Helping Older Adults
Home-based technologies like:
Cleaning systems
Security devices
Medical monitors
...can make daily life easier, especially for older adults. Future designs should be
easy to use, consistent, and smart enough to track, alert, and adapt to user needs.
[Link]
 VOICE USER INTERFACES (VUIS)
Voice assistants like Amazon Alexa, Apple Siri, Google Assistant, and Microsoft
Cortana are active appliances that understand speech, answer questions, and follow
voice commands.
What Makes Them Successful
High-quality speech recognition and generation
Pleasant design: Usually cylinder-shaped, minimal and home-friendly—not shaped like humans
They act as “supertools” (not friends or teammates)
If they can’t answer a question, they offer web links for more info
Examples of Usage
Asking for help, setting alarms, checking the weather
Sometimes people ask funny or philosophical questions like “Are you alive?” (Siri replies: “I’m
software, here to help.”)
VOICE USER INTERFACES (VUIS)
Special Use Cases
Voice Dictation
Helps people who:
Can’t type (due to injury or disability)
Need hands-free input (e.g., doctors reviewing X-rays while dictating notes)

Phone-Based Voice Control

Works well even with background noise
Speaker-independent: No training needed, but accents or speech issues can reduce accuracy
Voice Readers
Used for audiobooks, news, and web content
Popular for:
Visually impaired users
Multitaskers (e.g., listening while walking/driving)
Human voices are preferred for their emotion and clear pronunciation
VOICE USER INTERFACES (VUIS)
Limitations of Voice Interfaces

Issue Why it Matters

Interferes with conversations Can disrupt people nearby
You can't “see” past messages like you
Temporary (ephemeral)
can in text
Lower information density Less detailed than visual UI on a screen
Talking requires mental effort, hard to do
Cognitive load
while multitasking
E.g., fighter pilots need manual controls,
Not good for high-stress jobs
not voice
TEXT USER INTERFACES (TUIS)
Examples
Text-based chatbots used in:
Customer support (on websites or apps)
Mental health support
Personal AI companions

Chatbots and Their Roles

Failures
Microsoft Tay (2016): Became offensive and was shut down in a day
Hello Barbie (2015): Failed to gain popularity
TEXT USER INTERFACES (TUIS)
Successes
Xiaoice (China):
Based on Microsoft tech
Acts like a cheerful teenage girl
Reads news, sings songs, draws art
Avoids political topics (due to government restrictions)

Replika:
AI companion that learns your personality
Offers emotional support, especially after loss
Provides access to suicide hotlines

Woebot:
Mental health chatbot using Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
Helps with depression and anxiety
Backed by US health organizations
THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL ROBOTS

1. Social Robots: Limited Success So Far

Although some researchers and entrepreneurs still believe in the potential of social robots,
commercial adoption has been modest.
Studies show mixed user responses—some like social robots, but many users prefer simpler,
tool-like designs that give them more control.
2. User Preferences: Control Over Companionship
People generally favor devices that are comprehensible, predictable, and controllable.
Apple’s design philosophy supports this with principles like “User Control” and “Flexibility”,
emphasizing that users should always be in charge, not the technology.
THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
3. Social Acceptance vs. Utility
Research by Stanford psychologist Clifford Nass showed that people do respond
socially to robots, but that doesn’t always mean they prefer them over simpler tools.
Just because users treat a device like a social robot, doesn’t mean it should be designed
that way.
4. Psychological Barriers: Fear and the Uncanny Valley
Some people have "robophobia"—fear of robots or AI—which affects their comfort
levels.
Near-human designs can fall into the “uncanny valley”, where they look human-like
but not quite enough, making them creepy or unsettling
THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
5. Lessons from History: Function Over Form
Early anthropomorphic (human-like) designs often failed.
For example, ATMs became successful when they abandoned human-like designs and
focused on efficient, user-controlled experiences.
Trying to make machines look like people can erode trust, as users might feel
deceived.
6. Potential Use Cases: Elder Care and Disaster Relief
Some believe social robots could still be useful in:
Elder care, to help people live independently by handling daily tasks.
Disaster response, although tele-bots and drones have been more successful here, especially
when remotely operated by humans.
 THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL ROBOTS
7. Rethinking Design: Go Beyond Social Robots
•Instead of clinging to human-like robots, designers should imagine new types of helpful devices,
such as:
•A dishwasher built into the dining table for people with physical challenges.
•Robots in Amazon warehouses that don’t look human but are extremely efficient.
8.. The Better Path Forward
•Use proven voice-based virtual assistants (like Alexa or Siri) and text-based chatbots in active
appliance designs.
•These technologies can assist users efficiently, especially when combined with good interface
design.
•Future innovations could also include:
•Pet-like therapy robots (for mental health or companionship),
•Human-like exercise coaches,
•Provided they remain useful and appealing over time.