A Study on the Deployment of a Service Robot in an Elderly Care Center

  • David PortugalEmail author
  • Paulo Alvito
  • Eleni Christodoulou
  • George Samaras
  • Jorge Dias


In this article, we address the implementation and deployment of a service robot platform for interaction with the elderly in the context of a collaborative European initiative. Specifically, we overview the development of the robot system architecture and components, focusing on the graceful integration of a set of interoperable intelligent services towards advanced human–robot interaction. The service robot targets older people with light physical or psychological issues, delivering several different functionalities, and putting itself at their service. We describe the initial validation tests in a semi-controlled scenario, as well as the deployment of the robotic platform during a week-long pilot in an end user environment. The main challenges and the outcome of the experimental tests with the mobile robot platform are discussed, and results show generally positive reactions from the care center residents, which have provided their valuable feedback on the usability, appearance, interaction and satisfaction of the robot, yielding important lessons that were learned while performing the pilot.


Service robotics Human–robot interaction Social robotics AAL Elderly care 



This work was supported by the SocialRobot Project, funded under the 7th Framework Programme (FP7) Industry-Academia Partnerships and Pathways (IAPP), Marie Curie Programme 2011 by the European Commission, under Grant Agreement 285870. The authors would like to sincerely thank the Zuyderland Hoogstaete care center team in Sittard (The Netherlands), especially Roy Beumers, Leon van de Weem, Rachelle Wintjens and Cindy Wings, as well as the remaining researchers involved in the SocialRobot Project.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    European Commission (2015) The 2015 Ageing Report: underlying assumptions and projection methodologies, Joint Report prepared by the European Commission (DG ECFIN) and the Economic Policy Committee (AWG), Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Portugal D, Trindade P, Christodoulou E, Samaras G, Dias J (2015) On the development of a service robot for social interaction with the elderly. In: Proceeedings of the IET international conference on technologies for active and assisted living (TechAAL 2015), Kingston, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hagen C (1998) The rancho levels of cognitive functioning (revised), 3rd Edn. Accessed 28 May 2018
  4. 4.
    Breazeal C (2002) Designing sociable robots. MIT Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fong T, Nourbakhsh I, Dautenhahn K (2003) A survey of socially interactive robots. Robot Auton Syst 42(3):143–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roy N, Baltus G, Fox D, Gemperle F, Goetz J, Hirsch T, Margaritis D, Montemerlo M, Pineau J, Schulte J, Thrun S (2000) Towards personal service robots for the elderly. In: Workshop on interactive robots and entertainment (WIRE 2000), Pittsburgh, PA, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wada K, Shibata T, Saito T, Tanie K (2004) Effects of robot-assisted activity for elderly people and nurses at a day service center. Proc IEEE 92(11):1780–1788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goodrich MA, Schults AC (2007) Human–robot interaction: a survey. Found Trends Hum–Comput Interact 1(3):203–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sales FF, Portugal D, Rocha RP (2014) Real-time people detection and mapping system for a mobile robot using a RGB-D sensor. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on informatics in control, automation and robotics (ICINCO 2014), Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marder-Eppstein E, Berger E, Foote T, Gerkey B, Konolige K (2010) The office marathon: robust navigation in an indoor office environment. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA 2010), Anchorage, Alaska, pp 300–307Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garzo A, Martinez L, Isken M, Lowet D, Remazeilles A (2012) User studies of a mobile assistance robot for supporting elderly: methodology and results. In: Workshop on assistance and service robotics in a human environment, international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS 2012), Vilamoura, Algarve, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dixon C, Webster M, Saunders J, Fisher M, Dautenhahn K (2014) The fridge door is open—temporal verification of a robotic assistant’s behaviours. Advances in autonomous robotics systems, lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Vol. 8717, pp 97–108Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schiffer S, Ferrein A, Lakemeyer G (2012) CAESAR: an intelligent domestic service robot. In: Intelligent service robotics 5(4), pp 259–273. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen TL, Ciocarlie M, Cousins S, Grice P, Hawkins K, Hsiao K, Kemp CC, King C, Lazewatsky DA, Leeper A, Nguyen H, Paepcke A, Pantofaru C, Smart WD, Takayama L (2013) Robots for humanity: using assistive robots to empower people with disabilities. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 20(1):30–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Badii A, Etxeberria I, Huijnen C, Maseda M, Dittenberger S, Hochgatterer A, Thiemert D, Rigaud AS (2009) CompanionAble–mobile robot companion and smart home system for people with mild cognitive impairment. J Nutr Health Aging 13(Suppl. 1):S113Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Coradeschi S et al (2014) GiraffPlus: a system for monitoring activities and physiological parameters and promoting social interaction for elderly. Human–computer systems interaction: backgrounds and applications 3, advances in intelligent systems and computing. Springer, vol. 300, pp 261–271Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saunders J, Burke N, Koay KL, Dautenhahn K (2014) A user friendly robot architecture for re-ablement and co-learning in a sensorised home. Assistive technology: from research to practice, assistive technology research series. IOS Press, vol. 33, pp 49–58Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Esposito R, Cavallo F, Dario P, Marcellini F, Bevilacqua R, Felici E (2014) Robot-era project: preliminary results of robotic service in smart environments with elderly people. AAL Forum, Bucharest, RomaniaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nani M, Caleb-Solly P, Dogramadzi S, Fear T, van den Heuvel H (2010) MOBISERV: an integrated intelligent home environment for the provision of health, nutrition and mobility services to the elderly. In: Proceedings of 4th companion robotics workshop, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fischinger D, Einramhof P, Papoutsakis K, Wohlkinger W, Mayer P, Panek P, Hofmann S, Koertner T, Weiss A, Argyros A, Vincze M (2016) Hobbit, a care robot supporting independent living at home: first prototype and lessons learned. Robot Auton Syst 75:60–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Breazeal C, Scassellati B (2000) Infant-like social interactions between a robot and a human caregiver. Adapt Behav 8(1):49–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hirsch T, Forlizzi J, Hyder E, Goetz J, Kurtz C, Strobac J (2000) The ELDer project: social, emotional, and environmental factors in the design of eldercare technologies. In: Proceedings of the conference on universal usability (CUU ’00), pp 72–79Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sixsmith A, Gutman G (2013) Technologies for active aging. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Young JE, Hawkins R, Sharlin E, Igarashi T (2009) Toward acceptable domestic robots: applying insights from social psychology. Int J Soc Robot 1(1):95–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Broadbent E, Stafford R, MacDonald B (2009) Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: review and future directions. Int J Soc Robot 1(4):319–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Frennert S, Östlund B, Eftring H (2012) Would Granny let an assistive robot into her home? Social robotics, lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Vol. 7621, pp 128–137Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Krishnan RH, Pugazhenthi S (2014) Mobility assistive devices and self-transfer robotic systems for elderly, a review. Intell Serv Robot 7(1):37–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Palopoli L (2015) Navigation assistance and guidance of older adults across complex public spaces: the DALi approach. Intell Serv Robot 8(2):77–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Santos L, Portugal D, Christodoulou E, Samaras G, Alvito P, Dias J (2014) Personalizable ICT-based service provision: the SocialRobot solution. In: Proceedings of the AmI 2014 international workshop on intelligent environments supporting healthcare and well-being (WISHWell 2014), Eindhoven, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Quigley M, Conley K, Gerkey B, Faust J, Foote T, Leibs J, Wheeler R, Ng A (2009) ROS: an open-source robot operating system. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA 2009), Workshop on Open Source Software, Kobe, JapanGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Alvito P, Marques C, Carriço P, Freire J (2014) A robotic platform for the social robot project. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (ROMAN 2014), Workshop on interactive robots for aging and/or impaired people, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Social Robot Project D1.1: specification of user needs and requirements. Accessed 28 May 2018
  33. 33.
    Social Robot Project D2.1: Overall system architecture design. Accessed 28 May 2018
  34. 34.
    Randelli G, Bonanni TM, Iocchi L, Nardi D (2012) Knowledge acquisition through human-robot multimodal interaction. Intell Serv Robot 6(1):19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Grisetti G, Stachniss C, Burgard W (2007) Improved techniques for grid mapping with rao-blackwellized particle filters. IEEE Trans Robot 23(1):34–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fox D, Burgard W, Thrun S (1997) The dynamic window approach to collision avoidance. IEEE Robot Autom 4(1):23–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gerkey B, Konolige KK (2008) Planning and control in unstructured terrain. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA 2008), workshop on path planning on costmaps, Pasadena, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Thrun S, Burgard W, Fox D (2005) Probabilistic robotics. MIT Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Portugal D, Pippin C, Rocha RP, Christensen HH (2014) Finding optimal routes for multi-robot patrolling in generic graphs. In: Proceedings of 2014 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS 2014), ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Viola P, Jones M (2001) Rapid object detection using a boosted cascade of simple features. In: Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR 2001). IEEE, vol. 1Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Eyben F, Wöllmer M, Schuller BB (2009) openEAR—introducing the Munich open-source emotion and affect recognition toolkit. In: Proceedings of 3rd international conference on affective computing and intelligent interaction and workshops (ACII 2009), Amsterdam, Holland, pp 576–581Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ben Moussa M, Kasap Z, Thalmann NM, Chandramouli K, Mirza S, Zhang Q, Izquierdo E, Biperis I, Daras P (2010) Towards an expressive virtual tutor: an implementation of a virtual tutor based on an empirical study of non-verbal behaviour. In: Proceedings of of the 2010 ACM workshop on surreal media and virtual cloning (SMVC 2010), Florence, Italy, pp 39–44Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Portugal D, Santos L, Alvito P, Dias J, Samaras G, Christodoulou E (2015) SocialRobot: an interactive mobile robot for elderly home care. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/SICE international symposium on system integration (SII 2015), Nagoya, JapanGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Machado Santos J, Portugal D, Rocha RP (2013) An evaluation of 2D SLAM techniques available in robot operating system. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE international symposium on safety, security, and rescue robotics (SSRR 2013), Linköping, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nourbakhsh IR, Kunz C, Willeke T (2003) The mobot museum robot installations: a five year experiment. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS 2003), Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pp 3636–3641Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Portugal
    • 1
    Email author
  • Paulo Alvito
    • 2
  • Eleni Christodoulou
    • 1
  • George Samaras
    • 3
  • Jorge Dias
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Citard Services Ltd.Strovolos, NicosiaCyprus
  2. 2.IDMind - Engenharia de Sistemas, Lda.LisbonPortugal
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus
  4. 4.Institute of Systems and RoboticsUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  5. 5.Khalifa University of Science, Technology and Research (KUSTAR)Abu DhabiUAE

Personalised recommendations