“Robotprof krijgt 1,5 miljoen voor toponderzoek” titelde de kranten afgelopen zomer. Prof. Bram Vanderborght van de Vrije Universiteit Brussel kreeg met zijn onderzoeksgroep de subsidie van de European Research Council toegewezen voor onderzoek naar een nieuwe generatie aandrijvingen voor robots. De groep is ondermeer actief in het domein van de robotprotheses die bijvoorbeeld een been vervangen bij het wandelen, of exoskeletons die om het lichaam zitten om te helpen bij revalidatie en ontwikkelt daarnaast ook sociale robots die bijvoorbeeld kinderen met autisme communicatieve vaardigheden aanleren. Prof. Bram Vanderborght is dan ook de ideale man om het potentieel van robots voor de zorgsector toe te lichten en samen met ons een blik in de roboticatoekomst te werpen.

1. Het potentieel van
zorgrobotica
Prof dr ir Bram Vanderborght
!
Robotics Research Group
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
2/5/14
!1
pag.

2. Ageing population
Change 1990 to 2009
1990
(1) Excluding French overseas departments.
(2) Data may be affected by the change of population definition in 2008.
(3) 2008 instead of 2009.
Source: Eurostat (demo_pjanind)
In 1990
In 2060
Persons 65+ à
13,7 %
Persons
Figure 2.8: Population structure by major age groups, EU-27 (1) 65+ à
Persons 85+ à
Persons 85+ à
(% of total population)
3,1 %
3.1
3.3
4.5
12.3
12.7
14.4
increase with 250% k
increase with 400% k
6.9
8.9
11.0
12.1
16.6
18.0
17.8
17.8
75
50
à
à
5.7
10.6
100
30%
12%
66.8
67.2
67.2
64.6
61.9
59.2
57.1
56.0
25
19.5
17.2
15.6
15.4
14.5
14.0
14.1
14.0
1990
2000
2009
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
0
In 1990
67% of population
support population
80+ years
65-79 years
15-64 years
0-14 years
In 2060
Only 56% of population
support population
Working
(1) Excluding French overseas departments; 2020 to 2060 data are EUROPOP2008 convergence scenario.
Source: Eurostat (demo_pjanind and proj_08c2150p)
population shall
- Work harder
- Work more
To realize the same
Today 40 hout/week
!2
à In 2060:2/5/14
50 hour/week pag.

3. Increasing life expectancy
In 1960
Life expectancy
Belgium
69,66 years
Av. EU
67,72 years
In 2008 (50 years later)
Life expectancy
Belgium
80,10 years
Av. EU
78,66 years
At age of 65
Belgium
13,52 years
Av. EU
13,99 years
At age of 65
Belgium
19,50 years
Av. EU
18,46 years
!
Source:
HEIDI
data
tool
EU-­‐Commission
!
For Belgium this is an increase of 18,2% over 50 years !
1/5 longer life!!!
2/5/14
!3
pag.

4. Increased need for assistance
The need for Personal Assistance
with everyday activities increases with age.
!
% of persons needing assistance with
everyday activities by age
Not only functional weakness, but mobility also affected by lower motor
skills due to stroke or neurological misfunction
2/5/14
!4
pag.

5. Increased health cost
For EU by 2050:
!
healthcare spending increase
with 25%
For Flanders by 2050 :
• will be confronted much
stronger
• its demographic pattern counts
more elderly people
• And Healthcare costs are
higher in comparison with
other EU countries
!
• Today = 11,1% of GDP
= 36,8 billion EUR
Source: EU White Paper “Together for Health: A Strategic Approach for the EU 2008-2013”.
Health is the
greatest
wealth!
!
• Increase of 25%
= 9,2 billion EUR/year
2/5/14
!5
pag.

6. ?
2/5/14
!6
pag.

7. Robots are about to enter our daily life
Aibo
Justin
Claudia Mitchell
Roomba
2/5/14
!7
pag.

8. Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life,
business, and the global economy
Policy makers and societies need to prepare for
future technology. To do this well, they will need a
clear understanding of how technology might shape
the global economy and society over the coming
decades.
!
Since the Industrial Revolution, technology has had
a unique role in powering growth and transforming
economies.
!
The McKinsey Global Institute set out to identify
which of these technologies could have a massive
economically disruptive impact between now and
2025.
2/5/14
!8
pag.

9. Study Gartner
• 2013
Hype
Cycle
on
evolving
relationship
Combine
the
best
of
the
two
worlds
Machines
between
human
and
machine.
• precision
• repeatability
• 3
trends:
– Augmenting
humans
with
technology
– Machines
replacing
humans
– Humans
and
machines
working
alongside
each
other
• 3D
jobs
• …
Humans
• creativity
• problem
solving
• dexterity
• …
!
Human
robot
interaction
2/5/14
!9
pag.

10. New technology required
2/5/14
!10
pag.

11. Gait rehabilitation
GAIT IMPAIRMENT
❑ Neurological disorders:
Stroke , SCI , MS, …
❑
Impact on individual: Quality-Of-Life
❑
Impact on society: Health Care
MOTOR
COMMAND
GAIT RECOVERY
❑ “Relearning to walk by walking”
MOTOR RECOVERY
Sensory input
❑
Neural plasticity
Effort
Intensity
2/5/14
!11
pag.

12. Gait rehabilitation
treadmill training with
body-weight support
❑ resource intensive
❑
❑
labour intensive
LOW POTENTIAL
2/5/14
!12
pag.

13. Rehabilitation exoskeletons
Knexo VUB
ALTACRO VUB
2/5/14
!13
pag.

14. Mirad assistive exoskeleton
2/5/14
!14
pag.

15. Prostheses
2/5/14
!15
pag.

16. AMPfoot 2.0
AMPfoot 2 VUB
2/5/14
!16
pag.

17. Cyberlegs
Cyberlegs VUB-SSSA
2/5/14
!17
pag.

18. Social human-robot interaction
Human has
to be central
Machine is
central
screen
menus
keyboard
mouse
WALL-E
speech
–
emotions
-­‐
gestures
2/5/14
!18
pag.

19. The
social
huggable
robot
-­‐Human-­‐robot
interaction
focused
children
-­‐Robot-­‐Assisted
therapy
!
Abilities:
-­‐Able
of
verbal
communication
-­‐Directs
its
gaze
-­‐Express
emotions/animations
à social
interface
!
!
2/5/14
!19
pag.

20. Robot Assisted Therapy:
Autism Spectrum Disorders
!
‘Don’t underestimate persons with autism, try to understand’
‘Someone with ASDs is really like you, just more extreme’
!
•
•
•
•
•
•
widespread
abnormalities
of
social
interactions
and
communication
restricted
interests
highly
repetitive
behavior
pervasive, spectrum manifestation
may vary in level of severity
life-time condition
!
specific individualized treatment (recommended 25 hours/week)
early and adapted interventions
2/5/14
!20
pag.

21. Why social robots might be useful for ASD
treatments?
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
!
Safety
Simplicityàcomplexity
Predictability
Controlability
Interactivity
High level of motivation and involvement in tasks
The robot = social mediator:
2/5/14
!21
pag.

22. Aim of Probo
Aim is not to replace therapists with robots, but to use the
strengths of the robots to:
•
•
•
facilitate and improve the therapy process
mediate the human-child interaction
make the learning process more pleasant & motivating, by developing
attractive RAT games
2/5/14
!22
pag.

23. Also other social robots
2/5/14
!23
pag.

24. Conclusion
• Robots are about to enter our daily life
• Answer
to
societal
challenges
• Create
new
economic
markets
• Robots will be everywhere in different forms and
applications, impact bigger than the internet
• But still much research necessary
• Have to think about ethical problems as well
• Solve in a multidisciplinary research effort
2/5/14
!24
pag.

25. Research
team:
Prof.
dr.
ir.
Dirk
Lefeber,
Prof.
dr.
ir.
Bram
Vanderborght
!
Dr.
ir.
Ronald
Van
Ham,
Dr.
ir.
Michaël
Van
Damme,
Dr
ir
Heidi
Cuypers,
Dr.
ir.
Bjorn
Verrelst,
Dr.
ir.
Rene
Enrique
Jimenez
Fabian,
Dr.
ir.
Mizanoor
Rahman,
Dr.
ir.
Carlos
Rodriguez
Guerrero,
dr.
ir.
Pablo
Gómez
Esteban,
Dr.
ir.
Ramazan
Unal
!
lic.
Pierre
Cherelle,
ir.
Joseph
Jezic
von
Gesseneck,
ir.
Victor
Grosu,
ir.
Branko
Brackx,
ir.
Svetlana
Grosu,
ir.
Louis
Flynn,
ir.
Greet
Van
de
Perre,
ir.
Karen
Junius,
ir.
Glenn
Mathijssen,
ir.
Joost
Geeroms,
ing.
Tim
Schepers,
ir.
Maarten
Weckx,
ir.
Cao
Hoang
Long,
ir.
Laura
De
Rijcke,
ir
Tom
Verstraten,
ir
Marta
Moltedo,
Ramona
Simut,
Kristel
Knaepen,
Eva
Swinnen,
ir.
Hamed
Yaghini
!
The
work
was
supported
by
several
EU
and
national
projects:
FP7:
Viactors,
Corbys,
Cyberlegs,
H2R,
BIOMOT,
DREAM,
IWT-­‐SBO:Mirad
and
ERC
starting
grant
SPEAR
Bram.vanderborght@vub.ac.be
2/5/14
!25
pag.