As researchers in social care<\/a>, ageing and human-centred robotics<\/a>, we obviously watched Ann Droid<\/a> with a keen eye. Beneath the jokes are questions that researchers are already tackling. <\/p>\n Could robots help address loneliness among older people? Can a machine provide companionship without replacing human connection? While the series exaggerates what robots can currently do, some of the technology it depicts is already being tested.<\/p>\n A social enterprise in south-west England has been piloting Comfort Companions<\/a> in partnership with Age UK South Gloucestershire. AI-generated personas offer conversation and guidance to older people living alone and at risk of loneliness. <\/p>\n It runs alongside<\/a> Age UK\u2019s volunteer programme, with befrienders helping older people learn how to use the app. The AI companions are intended to supplement the waiting list for human befrienders rather than replacing them. <\/p>\n Physical robots are being tested too. West Berkshire Council has been running a trial<\/a> using robotic pets in its care homes. <\/p>\n Neither scheme offers robots who look like Linda. Current systems tend to be AI avatars on a screen or robotic cats or dogs, or speakers that provide a voice in the room. They do much less than Linda too. They can\u2019t help someone up after a fall, wash them or get them dressed. <\/p>\n What technology does currently do best is monitoring and prompting. Systems that can detect a fall and alert another person are far more mature, while technology can also encourage someone to contact friends, make a phone call, or get out of the house. <\/p>\n It\u2019s worth considering this distinction because loneliness<\/a> is not simply the same as being alone. It\u2019s a personal feeling<\/a> that our relationships are insufficient, accompanied by a desire for more or better social contact.<\/p>\n A robot companion, therefore, is unlikely to solve loneliness simply by being present. What matters is the quality of the interaction and whether technology can help someone maintain relationships with the people who matter to them.<\/p>\n This is one of the more interesting ideas in Ann Droid. Linda can sometimes strengthen Sue\u2019s existing relationships rather than replace them, encouraging her to meet friends and plan activities outside the home. That\u2019s potentially a more useful way to think about companion technology. The goal need not be to create an artificial friend who substitutes for a human one, but to help people remain connected to others.<\/p>\n The barriers are still substantial. Battery life is a limitation. Most humanoid robots manage between 90 minutes and five hours per charge when new. This is why an overnight camping trip featured in the sitcom is a fair test on the fantasy. <\/p>\n Robots are much better at some tasks than others. A machine may be able to play chess, for example, but picking up<\/a> an unfamiliar household object in the real world remains surprisingly difficult.<\/p>\n \n The social barriers are even harder. Robots struggle with the social subtleties that people take for granted. Systems that learn by copying human behaviour can reproduce an action without understanding its intention. They also cannot reliably interpret facial expressions.<\/p>\n A review<\/a> of systems designed to detect emotion from faces found that they performed worst when interpreting older faces, with anger and neutral expressions among the least reliably identified. This is important in care because recognising how someone is feeling can be crucial.<\/p>\n Ann Droid also plays on a more instinctive discomfort: should we trust a machine that\u2019s designed to look after us? The sitcom playfully touches on public worries about interacting with robotic companions, including people\u2019s distrust and worries about potential harms. For example, in one episode two robots enjoy a joke together about killing their human companions. <\/p>\nCan a machine make you less lonely?<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n Read more:
\n Even in Japan, robots are a long way from being fully-fledged carers \u2013 here\u2019s why<\/a>
\n <\/strong>
\n <\/em>\n<\/p>\n
\nWould we trust a robot carer?<\/h2>\n
![\"The](\"https:\/\/counter.theconversation.com\/content\/289430\/count.gif\")
<\/p>\n