Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 56 references

Towards Emotion Co-regulation with LLM-powered Socially Assistive Robots: Integrating LLM Prompts and Robotic Behaviors to Support Parent-Neurodivergent Child Dyads

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A supervised, LLM-powered social robot can improve parent-child interaction dynamics and may support emotion co-regulation in families with neurodivergent children.

desk verdict Honest design-study of an LLM+SAR system for parent-child co-regulation, but the pilot evidence is too confounded to support the claimed impact of the LLM-robot integration. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.10427 v1 pith:7PZYKGTM submitted 2025-07-14 cs.HC cs.RO

Jing Li , Felix Schijve , Sheng Li , Yuye Yang , Jun Hu , Emilia Barakova This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HCcs.RO
keywords LLM-poweredsocialrobotemotionco-regulationparent-childdyadsneurodivergentchildrensociallyassistiveroboticssupervisedautonomyMiRo-Equalitativepilotstudy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is an early feasibility study of a socially assistive robot that uses a large language model to speak and pre-programmed physical behaviors to intervene during stressful parent-child collaboration. The authors claim that this LLM-powered MiRo-E robot, run under supervised autonomy, positively changed interaction dynamics and shows potential to help parents and neurodivergent children co-regulate emotions. They base this on two pilot sessions with parent-child dyads (one girl with ADHD and her mother, one girl with ASD and her father), video observations, and post-experiment interviews analyzed with thematic analysis. If the claim holds, therapeutic social robots could move beyond fully remote-controlled operation toward more autonomous, language-capable support that addresses both the child's and the parent's stress.

What carries the argument

The system couples a local speech pipeline (Whisper v3 for speech recognition, LLaMa 3.2-1B for response generation, and SpeechT5 for text-to-speech) on a biomimetic MiRo-E robot with pre-programmed physical expressions such as head lowering, ear rotation, blinking, wagging its tail, and breathing-light synchronization. A mapping table links observed parent-child stress behaviors, coded with the Dyadic Parent-Child Interaction Coding System (DPICS), to an intervention strategy, an LLM prompt, and a robotic behavior; researchers watch the session remotely and trigger the intervention. The LEGO challenge task provides a controlled stressor with a visible timer. Together these pieces let the LLM supply flexible, context-aware words while the physical behaviors give the words emotional and embodied weight.

What would settle it

Run the same LEGO sessions with the robot present but silent, or with interventions triggered at random times; if stress relief and co-regulation look the same, then the robot's LLM prompt-and-behavior design is not what produced the effect.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that integrating LLM-generated verbal prompts with MiRo-E's physical behaviors can support emotion co-regulation in parent-neurodivergent child dyads during a stressful collaborative task. In the author's telling, the robot's questions such as “How are you feeling right now?” prompted parents and children to reflect on and articulate their emotions, its validation made parents feel acknowledged, and its self-disclosure through asking for petting created empathy and brief moments of relief. Parents and children adopted strategies such as deep breathing and positive reinforcement after practicing them with the robot. The authors therefore conclude that this is the first implementation of an LLM-powered social robot for this purpose and that the findings justify further design work on LLM-powered social assistive robotics for mental health.

Load-bearing premise

The results rest on the premise that a researcher watching the session can reliably notice stress moments and trigger the robot's intervention at the right time, so the observed benefits come from the robot's design rather than from the task or the robot's mere presence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Supervised autonomy with an LLM can let a social robot conduct varied, context-aware conversations while human observers keep control over when interventions happen.
  • Parents may carry the robot's modeled strategies, such as deep breathing and positive reinforcement, into their own parenting after the session ends.
  • Children may perceive the robot as a friend rather than a therapist and actively seek it out when they feel stressed.
  • Speaker identification, overlapping speech, and response latency are concrete bottlenecks that must be solved before wider deployment.
  • Future designs should add automatic emotional state detection, personalized prompts for different neurodivergent traits, and self-regulation support aimed at parents.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • With larger samples and automatic stress detection, the same architecture could be tested as a repeatable home-based co-regulation aid, not just a lab pilot.
  • Because parents often had to interpret and explain the robot's cues to their children, a future version could be explicitly designed as a triadic mediator that prompts parents to scaffold child-robot exchanges.
  • The robot's friend-like role may increase engagement, but it also raises questions about children forming emotional attachments to a device whose availability adults control.
  • A direct next experiment would compare the full LLM-plus-behavior system with a script-only robot to isolate what the language model's flexibility actually adds.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the design and pilot evaluation of an LLM-powered socially assistive robot (MiRo-E) for supporting emotion co-regulation between parents and neurodivergent children. The system integrates a local speech pipeline (Whisper, LLaMa 3.2-1B, SpeechT5) with pre-programmed physical robot behaviors, and human experimenters remotely trigger interventions during a challenging LEGO task. Two parent-child dyads participated, and qualitative thematic analysis of video recordings and interviews is used to derive findings about stress awareness, parental acknowledgment, adoption of strategies, triadic interaction dynamics, and technical challenges. The paper claims positive impacts on interaction dynamics and potential to facilitate emotion regulation, and it offers design implications for future LLM-powered SAR.

Significance. If reframed as an early feasibility and design exploration, the paper has value: the system implementation is described in concrete detail, Table I provides a systematic mapping of observed behaviors to intervention strategies, LLM prompts, and physical behaviors, and the qualitative data include illustrative quotes that generate hypotheses about how such robots might support emotion co-regulation. However, the evidence base does not support the current causal framing. The study has two self-selected dyads, no baseline or control condition, and interventions are manually triggered by the same researchers who analyze the data. The main contribution is therefore a design case study, not an evaluation of the LLM-robot integration's effectiveness. The design implications in Section IV-A are useful and should be retained, but the paper's stronger claims about positive impacts need to be substantially qualified.

major comments (3)
  1. [II-C and II-E] The central claim that the LLM-robot integration has positive impacts is not supported by the study design. Section II-C states that 'researchers can remotely trigger MiRo-E's interventions based on real-time behavioral observations,' and Section II-E confirms that 'experimenters remotely observed the interactions and activated MiRo-E to provide targeted interventions.' Because the timing and type of every intervention was a human decision, the observed effects cannot be attributed to the LLM or the integrated design rather than to the operator's judgment, the robot's physical presence, the novelty effect, or the structured task. There is no control condition (e.g., robot present but no intervention, or scripted non-LLM speech paired with the same physical behaviors), so the research question 'To what extent is the designed integration effective?' remains unanswered. The paper should either add a control condition or reframe the findings as a human-in-the-loop feasibility exercise, explicitly stating that the LLM's specific contribution is untested.
  2. [Table I and Section III-A.4] The reported 'adoption of strategies' is partly circular. The LLM prompts in Table I explicitly instruct the robot to guide deep breathing, invite petting/physical touch, and prompt positive reinforcement. Section III-A.4 then reports that parents and children 'independently took deep breaths when experiencing stress' and that a parent 'adjusted their educational strategies by incorporating more positive reinforcement' after experiencing the intervention. These observations are at least in part direct compliance with the scripted prompts, not evidence of independent strategy adoption. The parent interview quotes provide some independent grounding, but the theme as written overstates what the data can show. The authors should separate in-the-moment compliance from spontaneous transfer and temper the wording accordingly.
  3. [Section III (opening)] The sentence 'No significant differences in dyadic or triadic interactions were concluded between the two sessions' is an inappropriate statistical claim for a qualitative study with two dyads. No inferential test was performed, and the sample size precludes any claim about significance. This should be removed or rephrased as 'no systematic qualitative differences were observed between the two sessions' to avoid implying statistical rigor that the data do not have.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Author block] There is a missing space in 'Netherlandsj.hu@tue.nl' in the author affiliations block; it should read 'Netherlands j.hu@tue.nl'.
  2. [References] The reference for LLaMa is given as 'Touvron and et al.' which is ungrammatical; it should be 'Touvron, H., et al.' or the full author list. The OpenAI Whisper reference is also inconsistent in style (organization name only). Please standardize the citation format.
  3. [Abstract and Section II-C] The Abstract describes the system as 'supervised autonomous' while Section II-C explains that researchers can remotely trigger interventions. The level of autonomy should be described more precisely, for example by distinguishing 'human-triggered intervention selection' from 'autonomous LLM response generation within a triggered intervention.' This would help readers avoid overestimating the system's autonomy.
  4. [Section II-F] The thematic analysis procedure is described as developing a codebook on Dedoose and double-coding with a third analyst, which is appropriate, but no information is given about inter-rater reliability or the number of coding disagreements; adding a brief statement would strengthen the reporting.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Minor self-referential echo: findings under Theme 1 partially restate what the Table I prompts scripted; the central feasibility claim still rests on independent qualitative evidence.

  1. self definitional [Table I (Breathing exercises and Encourage positive reinforcement rows) and Section III-A-4]
    "Table I: 'You can guide the parent and child through deep breathing exercises together.' and 'Encourage the parent to use positive reinforcement by acknowledging the child's progress and efforts.' Section III-A-4: 'After practicing Breathing exercises guided by MiRo-E, P-1, C-1 and C-2 independently took deep breaths when experiencing stress, even without MiRo-E's initiation.'"

    The intervention is defined by a prompt that explicitly instructs the exact behavior later reported as a finding: the Breathing exercises prompt scripts deep breathing, the Positive reinforcement prompt scripts praise, and Section III-A-4 then presents dyads performing deep breathing and a parent adopting positive reinforcement as evidence that MiRo-E 'facilitated parent-child co-regulation of emotions and stress.' To the extent the observed behavior is the direct execution of the scripted request, that portion of the reported outcome is contained in the input by construction.

full rationale

This paper makes a design-and-feasibility claim from a two-dyad qualitative pilot; there are no fitted parameters, equations, or first-principles predictions, so most circularity patterns (fitted input called prediction, imported uniqueness theorems, ansatz smuggling, renaming) do not apply. Load-bearing premises rest on external sources: co-regulation strategies on [4] (Gulsrud et al.), behavioral coding on [44] (DPICS, Eyberg and Robinson), and the supervised-autonomy framing on [23] (Esteban et al.), none of which are the authors' own work. The authors' self-citations ([10], [11], [18], [20], [35]) are contextual prior design explorations and are not load-bearing for the conclusions. The single reduction-flavored step is the Table I prompt-to-finding echo described above: scripted requests reappear as evidence of impact. It is flagged as minor because the paper also logs prompt-independent evidence, including children spontaneously seeking support (III-B-2: 'Miro, can you talk to me? I am stressed.'), unprompted empathy petting (III-A-3), parents ignoring interventions (III-B-4), and speaker-target ambiguity (III-B-5), so the findings are not a rubber stamp of the script. The design's true weakness is validity, not circularity: experimenters remotely triggered every intervention based on real-time DPICS observation (Section II-E), with no baseline or LLM-absent condition, so the LLM's contribution cannot be isolated from operator judgment, robot presence, or task structure. Per the analysis rules, that confound belongs to correctness risk rather than the circularity score. The paper's own limitations section (IV-A) acknowledges technical challenges but not this confound; the abstract's 'positive impacts' phrasing accordingly overstates what a human-in-the-loop feasibility exercise can support. Overall: one minor self-definitional echo, central claim retaining independent content, so the score is 2.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numeric parameters are fitted to data. The central design choices are hand-authored prompts, human-selected intervention triggers, and hand-programmed robot behaviors, all listed as free parameters. The key unproven premises are the validity of real-time human stress detection, the safety of unfiltered LLM output for children, and the transferability of a two-dyad pilot.

free parameters (3)
  • Intervention trigger selection = Human expert judgment (DPICS)
    Researchers remotely decide when and which intervention to run based on real-time observation; no automated or pre-specified numeric threshold.
  • LLM prompt templates = Five hand-authored prompts (Table I)
    The verbal intervention content is authored by the researchers and fixed per strategy; results are specific to these prompts.
  • Robot behavior mappings = Hand-programmed expressions per strategy
    Physical responses such as head movement, ear rotation, blinking, and back-light sync are manually programmed and selected by the experimenter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The selected co-regulation strategies (deep breathing, physical touch, positive reinforcement, emotion validation, refocus) are effective and appropriate for neurodivergent children and their parents.
    Invoked in Section II-C as the basis for designing interventions; supported by literature citations, but not verified for this robot context.
  • domain assumption Stress-related behaviors in the dyad can be validly identified in real time via DPICS coding.
    Section II-C: intervention moments are identified based on DPICS-coded stress behaviors; no inter-rater reliability or validation data are reported.
  • domain assumption LLM-generated speech and TTS output are safe and developmentally appropriate for a stressed 10-year-old with ASD or ADHD.
    The system runs locally and has no described content filter or safety review; this assumption is unstated in Sections II-B and II-C.
  • domain assumption The two recruited dyads provide transferable insight into the target population of parent-neurodivergent child dyads.
    Recruitment via personal networks and heterogeneity of diagnoses (ADHD and ASD) limit generalizability; used implicitly in Section III synthesis of themes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards Emotion Co-regulation with LLM-powered Socially Assistive Robots: Integrating LLM Prompts and Robotic Behaviors to Support Parent-Neurodivergent Child Dyads." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7PZYKGTM

@misc{pith2026250710427,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards Emotion Co-regulation with LLM-powered Socially Assistive Robots: Integrating LLM Prompts and Robotic Behaviors to Support Parent-Neurodivergent Child Dyads},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7PZYKGTM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.10427}
}
read the original abstract

Socially Assistive Robotics (SAR) has shown promise in supporting emotion regulation for neurodivergent children. Recently, there has been increasing interest in leveraging advanced technologies to assist parents in co-regulating emotions with their children. However, limited research has explored the integration of large language models (LLMs) with SAR to facilitate emotion co-regulation between parents and children with neurodevelopmental disorders. To address this gap, we developed an LLM-powered social robot by deploying a speech communication module on the MiRo-E robotic platform. This supervised autonomous system integrates LLM prompts and robotic behaviors to deliver tailored interventions for both parents and neurodivergent children. Pilot tests were conducted with two parent-child dyads, followed by a qualitative analysis. The findings reveal MiRo-E's positive impacts on interaction dynamics and its potential to facilitate emotion regulation, along with identified design and technical challenges. Based on these insights, we provide design implications to advance the future development of LLM-powered SAR for mental health applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.10427 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. MiRo-E with parent-child dyads in challenging tasks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. MiRo-E’s physical expression examples: Sleepy; [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Implementation of speech communication module in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The framework of the LLM-powered SAR in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Diagram of experiment procedure D. LEGO game with LLM-powered MiRo-E The LEGO game, inspired by psychological studies [45], [46], was designed as an emotionally challenging task to evaluate the effectiveness of the LLM-powered MiRo-E in parent-child interactions. LEGO-…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G Thompson, Emotion regulation, New York: The Guilford Press, 2007

    work page 2007

  2. [2]

    Emotion regulation and parent co-regulation in children with autism spectrum disorder,

    Victoria Ting and Jonathan A Weiss, “Emotion regulation and parent co-regulation in children with autism spectrum disorder,” Journal of autism and developmental disorders , vol. 47, pp. 680–689, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Un- packing the lived experiences of smartwatch mediated self and co- regulation with adhd children,

    Lucas M Silva, Franceli L Cibrian, Elissa Monteiro, Arpita Bhat- tacharya, Jesus A Beltran, Clarisse Bonang, Daniel A Epstein, Sab- rina EB Schuck, Kimberley D Lakes, and Gillian R Hayes, “Un- packing the lived experiences of smartwatch mediated self and co- regulation with adhd children,” in Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Comp...

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    The co-regulation of emotions between mothers and their children with autism,

    Amanda C Gulsrud, Laudan B Jahromi, and Connie Kasari, “The co-regulation of emotions between mothers and their children with autism,” Journal of Autism and Developmental disorders , vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 227–237, 2010

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    The impact of parenting stress: A meta-analysis of studies comparing the experience of par- enting stress in parents of children with and without autism spectrum disorder,

    Stephanie A Hayes and Shelley L Watson, “The impact of parenting stress: A meta-analysis of studies comparing the experience of par- enting stress in parents of children with and without autism spectrum disorder,” Journal of autism and developmental disorders , vol. 43, pp. 629–642, 2013

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    The importance of parenting in influencing the lives of children,

    Matthew R Sanders and Karen MT Turner, “The importance of parenting in influencing the lives of children,” Handbook of parenting and child development across the lifespan , pp. 3–26, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Co- designing situated displays for family co-regulation with adhd chil- dren,

    Lucas M Silva, Franceli L Cibrian, Clarisse Bonang, Arpita Bhat- tacharya, Aehong Min, Elissa M Monteiro, Jesus Armando Beltran, Sabrina Schuck, Kimberley D Lakes, Gillian R Hayes, et al., “Co- designing situated displays for family co-regulation with adhd chil- dren,” in Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2024, pp. 1–19

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Parental involvement in robot-mediated intervention: a systematic review,

    Adriana Piccolo, Carmela De Domenico, Marcella Di Cara, Carmela Settimo, Francesco Corallo, Simona Leonardi, Caterina Impallomeni, Emanuela Tripodi, Angelo Quartarone, and Francesca Cucinotta, “Parental involvement in robot-mediated intervention: a systematic review,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 15, pp. 1355901, 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Changing family practices with assistive technology: Mobero improves morning and bedtime routines for children with adhd,

    Tobias Sonne, J ¨org M ¨uller, Paul Marshall, Carsten Obel, and Kaj Grønbæk, “Changing family practices with assistive technology: Mobero improves morning and bedtime routines for children with adhd,” in Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing syst...

    2016

  2. [10]

    Stress diffuser: A biofeedback agent for stress management in children during homework with parent involvement,

    Jing Li, Pinhao Wang, Emilia I Barakova, Jun Hu, and Guang Dai, “Stress diffuser: A biofeedback agent for stress management in children during homework with parent involvement,” in Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference, 2024, pp. 701–705

    2024

  3. [11]

    Evaluating the role of interactive encouragement prompts for parents in parent–child stress management,

    Pinhao Wang, Lening Huang, Guang Dai, Jing Li, Jun Hu, Emilia Barakova, Cheng Yao, and Fangtian Ying, “Evaluating the role of interactive encouragement prompts for parents in parent–child stress management,” Applied Sciences, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 256, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    thesis, Open Access Te Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington, 2023

    Aisha Iskanderani, Research Through Design for Anger Co-Emotion Regulation Learning in Young Children: A Soft Toy Design for Deep Breathing, Ph.D. thesis, Open Access Te Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Wakey: assisting parent-child communication for better morning routines,

    Meng-Ying Chan, Yi-Hsuan Lin, Long-Fei Lin, Ting-Wei Lin, Wei- Che Hsu, Chia-yu Chang, Rui Liu, Ko-Yu Chang, Min-hua Lin, and Jane Yung-jen Hsu, “Wakey: assisting parent-child communication for better morning routines,” in Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Sup...

    2017

  6. [14]

    Effect of social robot’s role and behavior on parent-toddler interaction,

    Omer Gvirsman and Goren Gordon, “Effect of social robot’s role and behavior on parent-toddler interaction,” in Proceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction , 2024, pp. 222–230

    2024

  7. [15]

    Exploring technology- mediated parental socialisation of emotion: Leveraging an embodied, in-situ intervention for child emotion regulation,

    Nikki Theofanopoulou and Petr Slovak, “Exploring technology- mediated parental socialisation of emotion: Leveraging an embodied, in-situ intervention for child emotion regulation,” in Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 2022, pp. 1–16

    2022

  8. [16]

    Designing parent-child-robot interactions to facilitate in-home parental math talk with young children,

    Hui-Ru Ho, Nathan Thomas White, Edward M Hubbard, and Bilge Mutlu, “Designing parent-child-robot interactions to facilitate in-home parental math talk with young children,” in Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference , 2023, pp. 355–366

    2023

  9. [17]

    Defining socially assistive robotics,

    David Feil-Seifer and Maja J Mataric, “Defining socially assistive robotics,” in 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics,

  10. [18]

    Socially grounded game strategy enhances bonding and perceived smartness of a humanoid robot,

    Emilia I Barakova, Mirjam De Haas, Wouter Kuijpers, Natalia Irigoyen, and Alessandro Betancourt, “Socially grounded game strategy enhances bonding and perceived smartness of a humanoid robot,” Connection Science, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 81–98, 2018

    2018

  11. [19]

    So- cially assistive robots as mental health interventions for children: a scoping review,

    Katarzyna Kabaci ´nska, Tony J Prescott, and Julie M Robillard, “So- cially assistive robots as mental health interventions for children: a scoping review,” International Journal of Social Robotics , vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 919–935, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Context-enhanced human-robot interaction: exploring the role of system interactivity and multimodal stimuli on the engagement of people with dementia,

    Yuan Feng, Giulia Perugia, Suihuai Yu, Emilia I Barakova, Jun Hu, and GW Matthias Rauterberg, “Context-enhanced human-robot interaction: exploring the role of system interactivity and multimodal stimuli on the engagement of people with dementia,” International Journal of Socia...

    2022

  13. [21]

    Preferences of seniors for robots delivering a message with congruent approaching behavior,

    Maria TH Van Otterdijk, Margot ME Neggers, J Torresen, and Emilia I Barakova, “Preferences of seniors for robots delivering a message with congruent approaching behavior,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Robotics and Its Social Impacts (ARSO) . IEEE, 2021, pp. 66–72

    2021

  14. [22]

    Do i have a personality? endowing care robots with context-dependent personality traits,

    Antonio Andriella, Henrique Siqueira, Di Fu, Sven Magg, Pablo Barros, Stefan Wermter, Carme Torras, and Guillem Alenya, “Do i have a personality? endowing care robots with context-dependent personality traits,” International Journal of Social Robotics , vol. 13, pp. 2081–2102, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    How to build a supervised autonomous system for robot-enhanced therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder,

    Pablo G Esteban, Paul Baxter, Tony Belpaeme, Erik Billing, Haibin Cai, Hoang-Long Cao, Mark Coeckelbergh, Cristina Costescu, Daniel David, Albert De Beir, et al., “How to build a supervised autonomous system for robot-enhanced therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder...

    2017

  16. [24]

    Robots for use in autism research,

    Brian Scassellati, Henny Admoni, and Maja Matari ´c, “Robots for use in autism research,” Annual review of biomedical engineering , vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 275–294, 2012

    2012

  17. [25]

    Robot-assisted therapy for autism spectrum disorders with (partially) autonomous control: Challenges and outlook,

    Serge Thill, Cristina A Pop, Tony Belpaeme, Tom Ziemke, and Bram Vanderborght, “Robot-assisted therapy for autism spectrum disorders with (partially) autonomous control: Challenges and outlook,” Pala- dyn, vol. 3, pp. 209–217, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Understanding the benefits and challenges of deploying conversational ai leveraging large language models for public health intervention,

    Eunkyung Jo, Daniel A Epstein, Hyunhoon Jung, and Young-Ho Kim, “Understanding the benefits and challenges of deploying conversational ai leveraging large language models for public health intervention,” in Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing S...

    2023

  19. [27]

    Emotional intelligence of large language models,

    Xuena Wang, Xueting Li, Zi Yin, Yue Wu, and Jia Liu, “Emotional intelligence of large language models,” Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, vol. 17, pp. 18344909231213958, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    “chatting with chatgpt

    Devadas Menon and K Shilpa, ““chatting with chatgpt”: Analyzing the factors influencing users’ intention to use the open ai’s chatgpt using the utaut model,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 11, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Exploring the use of a voice-based conversational agent to empower adolescents with autism spectrum disorder,

    Inha Cha, Sung-In Kim, Hwajung Hong, Heejeong Yoo, and Youn- kyung Lim, “Exploring the use of a voice-based conversational agent to empower adolescents with autism spectrum disorder,” in Proceed- ings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2021, pp. 1–15

    2021

  22. [30]

    Unlock life with a chat (gpt): Integrating conversational ai with large language models into everyday lives of autistic individuals,

    Dasom Choi, Sunok Lee, Sung-In Kim, Kyungah Lee, Hee Jeong Yoo, Sangsu Lee, and Hwajung Hong, “Unlock life with a chat (gpt): Integrating conversational ai with large language models into everyday lives of autistic individuals,” in Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Fa...

    2024

  23. [31]

    The rise and potential of large language model based agents: A survey,

    Zhiheng Xi, Wenxiang Chen, Xin Guo, Wei He, Yiwen Ding, Boyang Hong, Ming Zhang, Junzhe Wang, Senjie Jin, Enyu Zhou, et al., “The rise and potential of large language model based agents: A survey,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.07864 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Socially assistive robots and sensory feedback for engaging older adults in cognitive activities,

    Emilyann Nault, Lynne Baillie, and Frank Broz, “Socially assistive robots and sensory feedback for engaging older adults in cognitive activities,” ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction , vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–26, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    How can large language models enable better socially assistive human-robot interaction: A brief survey,

    Zhonghao Shi, Ellen Landrum, Amy O’Connell, Mina Kian, Leticia Pinto-Alva, Kaleen Shrestha, Xiaoyuan Zhu, and Maja J Matari ´c, “How can large language models enable better socially assistive human-robot interaction: A brief survey,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series...

    2024

  26. [34]

    Understanding large-language model (llm)-powered human-robot interaction,

    Callie Y Kim, Christine P Lee, and Bilge Mutlu, “Understanding large-language model (llm)-powered human-robot interaction,” in Proceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, 2024, pp. 371–380

    2024

  27. [35]

    Design of child- robot interactions for comfort and distraction from post-operative pain and distress,

    Oriana Isabella Ferrari, Feiran Zhang, Ayrton A Braam, Jules AM Van Gurp, Frank Broz, and Emilia I Barakova, “Design of child- robot interactions for comfort and distraction from post-operative pain and distress,” in Companion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on H...

    2023

  28. [36]

    Children’s evaluations of a therapy dog and biomimetic robot: influ- ences of animistic beliefs and social interaction,

    Olivia Barber, Eszter Somogyi, Anne E McBride, and Leanne Proops, “Children’s evaluations of a therapy dog and biomimetic robot: influ- ences of animistic beliefs and social interaction,” International Journal of Social Robotics , vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1411–1425, 2021

    2021

  29. [37]

    An explorative study on robotics for supporting children with autism spectrum disorder during clinical procedures,

    Alessandro Di Nuovo, Josh Bamforth, Daniela Conti, Karen Sage, Rachel Ibbotson, Judy Clegg, Anna Westaway, and Karen Arnold, “An explorative study on robotics for supporting children with autism spectrum disorder during clinical procedures,” in Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE I...

    2020

  30. [38]

    Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models,

    Hugo Touvron and et al., “Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models,” 2023

    2023

  31. [39]

    Whisper: Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,

    OpenAI, “Whisper: Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision,” 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    Attention is all you need,

    Ashish Vaswani and et al., “Attention is all you need,” Proc. NeurlPS, 2017

    2017

  33. [41]

    Breath practices for survivor and caregiver stress, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder: Connection, co-regulation, compassion,

    Patricia Gerbarg, Richard Brown, Chris Streeter, Martin Katzman, and Monica Vermani, “Breath practices for survivor and caregiver stress, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder: Connection, co-regulation, compassion,” OBM Integrative and Complementary Medicine, vol. 4,...

    2019

  34. [42]

    Affective touch and regulation of stress responses,

    Tara Kidd, Shaunna L Devine, and Susannah C Walker, “Affective touch and regulation of stress responses,” Health psychology review , vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 60–77, 2023

    2023

  35. [43]

    Savannah Bayer, An Investigation into the Relationship between Mother-Child Co-Regulation Patterns and Self-Regulation Develop- ment, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 2021

    2021

  36. [44]

    Dyadic parent-child interaction coding system,

    Sheila M Eyberg and Elizabeth A Robinson, “Dyadic parent-child interaction coding system,” Seattle, WA: Parenting Clinic, University of Washington, 1981

    1981

  37. [45]

    Assessing biobehavioural self-regulation and coregulation in early childhood: The parent-child challenge task,

    Erika Lunkenheimer, Christine J Kemp, Rachel G Lucas-Thompson, Pamela M Cole, and Erin C Albrecht, “Assessing biobehavioural self-regulation and coregulation in early childhood: The parent-child challenge task,” Infant and Child Development , vol. 26, no. 1, pp. e1965, 2017

    2017

  38. [46]

    Physiological contagion in parent–child dyads during an emotional challenge,

    Emily W Shih, Laura E Qui ˜nones-Camacho, Alexander Karan, and Elizabeth L Davis, “Physiological contagion in parent–child dyads during an emotional challenge,” Social Development, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 620–636, 2019

    2019

  39. [47]

    Greg Guest, Kathleen M MacQueen, and Emily E Namey, Applied thematic analysis, sage publications, 2011

    2011

  40. [48]

    Towards adaptive autonomous robots in autism therapy: Varieties of interactions,

    Kerstin Dautenhahn, Iain Werry, Tamie Salter, and Rene Boekhorst, “Towards adaptive autonomous robots in autism therapy: Varieties of interactions,” in Proceedings 2003 IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation. Computa- tional Intel...

    2003

  41. [49]

    Why robots? a survey on the roles and benefits of social robots in the therapy of children with autism,

    John-John Cabibihan, Hifza Javed, Marcelo Ang, and Sharifah Mariam Aljunied, “Why robots? a survey on the roles and benefits of social robots in the therapy of children with autism,” International journal of social robotics , vol. 5, pp. 593–618, 2013

    2013

  42. [50]

    Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language,

    Stephen C Levinson and Francisco Torreira, “Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language,” Frontiers in psychology, vol. 6, pp. 731, 2015

    2015

  43. [51]

    A secured private-cloud computing system,

    Modebola Olowu, Chika Yinka-Banjo, Sanjay Misra, and Hector Florez, “A secured private-cloud computing system,” in Applied Informatics: Second International Conference, ICAI 2019, Madrid, Spain, November 7–9, 2019, Proceedings 2 . Springer, 2019, pp. 373– 384

    2019

  44. [52]

    Language model can listen while speaking,

    Ziyang Ma, Yakun Song, Chenpeng Du, Jian Cong, Zhuo Chen, Yuping Wang, Yuxuan Wang, and Xie Chen, “Language model can listen while speaking,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.02622 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Asd-chat: An innovative dialogue intervention system for children with autism based on llm and vb-mapp,

    Chengyun Deng, Shuzhong Lai, Chi Zhou, Mengyi Bao, Jingwen Yan, Haifeng Li, Lin Yao, and Yueming Wang, “Asd-chat: An innovative dialogue intervention system for children with autism based on llm and vb-mapp,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01867 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Parent, child, and reciprocal influences.,

    Richard Q Bell, “Parent, child, and reciprocal influences.,” American Psychologist, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 821, 1979

    1979

  47. [55]

    Examining the mediating role of mindful parenting: A study on the relationship between parental emotion regulation difficulties and problem behaviors of children with asd,

    Aydan Aydin, “Examining the mediating role of mindful parenting: A study on the relationship between parental emotion regulation difficulties and problem behaviors of children with asd,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 1873–1883, 2023

    2023

  48. [2005]

    IEEE, 2005, pp

    ICORR 2005. IEEE, 2005, pp. 465–468

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.