Better Policies for De-Identified Health Data

The staggering amount of personal health data now being collected for treatment or billing purposes has a life beyond the doctor's clipboard. That data is collected, stripped of personally identifying information ("de-identified") and re-used in ways that are vital for medical breakthroughs, improving patient care, or predicting public health trends.  And it's just as valuable when used for targeted marketing campaigns or eliminating inefficiencies in the healthcare industry.  

HIPAA restricts uses of identifiable health information for secondary purposes; but information that is de-identified per HIPAA standards is largely not subject to federal regulation.  As a result, de-identified health data is in high demand.

The HIPAA de-identification standards were controversial when introduced in 2000.  The reason: no record of personal information can be truly de-identified to the point where there is no risk of becoming identifiable. The Department of Health and Human Services acknowledged this risk when approving the standard, but at the time said it was comfortable with "a reasonable balance between the risk of identification and the usefulness of the information."

Time has not erased the initial concerns about the de-identification standards. Those concerns appear to be on the rise and fall into three categories:  1) sufficiency of the methods used for de-identification; 2) lack of accountability for unauthorized or inappropriate re-identification; and 3) disapproval of certain uses of de-identified data.  

In 2009, CDT began exploring concerns about HIPAA de-identification. In October 2011, we held a workshop for about 50 academic, industry and consumer stakeholders to discuss some policy ideas for addressing de-identified data concerns.  A paper based on the findings of that workshop will be published by the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. (An online version of the paper was published in June 26, 2012.)

The paper includes more details on the following policy options for addressing concerns about de-identified health data:

•    Prohibiting by law or contract the unauthorized re-identification of de-identified data;
•    Ensuring strong, dependable de-identification methods through consistent review of safe harbor methodology and objectively vetting statistical approaches;
•    Requiring reasonable security safeguards for de-identified data (today no such safeguards are required); and
•    Providing greater transparency to the public regarding uses of de-identified data.

CDT believes these policy ideas merit greater discussion.  De-identification should remain an important tool for protecting privacy while preserving the availability of data for uses critical to advancing a more effective and efficient healthcare system. 

View the original article here

Better Policies for De-Identified Health Data

The staggering amount of personal health data now being collected for treatment or billing purposes has a life beyond the doctor's clipboard. That data is collected, stripped of personally identifying information ("de-identified") and re-used in ways that are vital for medical breakthroughs, improving patient care, or predicting public health trends.  And it's just as valuable when used for targeted marketing campaigns or eliminating inefficiencies in the healthcare industry.  

HIPAA restricts uses of identifiable health information for secondary purposes; but information that is de-identified per HIPAA standards is largely not subject to federal regulation.  As a result, de-identified health data is in high demand.

The HIPAA de-identification standards were controversial when introduced in 2000.  The reason: no record of personal information can be truly de-identified to the point where there is no risk of becoming identifiable. The Department of Health and Human Services acknowledged this risk when approving the standard, but at the time said it was comfortable with "a reasonable balance between the risk of identification and the usefulness of the information."

Time has not erased the initial concerns about the de-identification standards. Those concerns appear to be on the rise and fall into three categories:  1) sufficiency of the methods used for de-identification; 2) lack of accountability for unauthorized or inappropriate re-identification; and 3) disapproval of certain uses of de-identified data.  

In 2009, CDT began exploring concerns about HIPAA de-identification. In October 2011, we held a workshop for about 50 academic, industry and consumer stakeholders to discuss some policy ideas for addressing de-identified data concerns.  A paper based on the findings of that workshop will be published by the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. (An online version of the paper was published in June 26, 2012.)

The paper includes more details on the following policy options for addressing concerns about de-identified health data:

•    Prohibiting by law or contract the unauthorized re-identification of de-identified data;
•    Ensuring strong, dependable de-identification methods through consistent review of safe harbor methodology and objectively vetting statistical approaches;
•    Requiring reasonable security safeguards for de-identified data (today no such safeguards are required); and
•    Providing greater transparency to the public regarding uses of de-identified data.

CDT believes these policy ideas merit greater discussion.  De-identification should remain an important tool for protecting privacy while preserving the availability of data for uses critical to advancing a more effective and efficient healthcare system. 

View the original article here

SECURE IT: Building a Better Back-Door Wiretap

[Editors Note: This is one in a of series of blog posts from CDT on the Cybersecurity Act, S. 3414, a bill co-sponsored by Senators Lieberman and Collins that is slated to be considered on the Senate floor soon.] 

Senate Republicans plan to push an alternative cybersecurity bill that raises fundamental civil liberties concerns.  It permits ISPs and others to share broadly-defined cyber threat information with the federal government, it allows the information to be used for purposes unrelated to cybersecurity, and it permits the information to be shared directly with the National Security Agency (NSA), a military spy agency.  

The Republican substitute will be a revised version of the SECURE IT Act (now numbered S. 3342, formerly S. 2151), introduced by Senator McCain and other Republicans.  The original version of SECURE IT drew strong criticism in a May 14 letter from CDT and other privacy groups across the political spectrum.  We said back then that the bill raised fundamental civil liberties issues, did not address concerns raised by the Cybersecurity Act, and was not a viable alternative to the leading bill, sponsored by Senators Lieberman and Collins.  

SECURE IT supporters will no doubt argue that changes made to the bill adequately protect civil liberties while promoting cybersecurity. However, the new version of SECURE IT makes only modest privacy improvements, mainly through tightening definitions, clarifying government contractor obligations to share information, and requiring Inspectors General reports.  However, the changes made merely nibble around the edges of more substantial flaws:  SECURE IT is still a back-door wiretap bill.  

Under SECURE IT, whenever a private company shares information with a civilian government agency, the civilian agency must immediately share it with all of the cybersecurity centers established in the bill, including NSA and DOD's Cyber Command.

Adoption of the Republican substitute (SECURE IT) as a substitute for Lieberman-Collins would mark a substantial step backwards for civil liberties.  Below, we explain the fundamental flaws in SECURE IT and explain how improvements made to the bill do not address these fundamental flaws.  A comparison of the information sharing provisions of the two bills can be found in this chart.

I.  Fundamental Flaws In SECURE IT

Under SECURE IT, companies may disclose "cyber threat information" to government cybersecurity centers, notwithstanding any other provision of law.  This means that if a privacy law protects information by requiring a warrant for government access, that information could be shared without a warrant.  One cybersecurity center would be located within the NSA and others would be in other elements of the Defense Department, in the Department of Homeland Security and in the Justice Department.  All cyber threat information shared with any cybersecurity center would be shared immediately with the NSA and every other cybersecurity center even if the cyber threat indicator was unrelated to the overall mission of the entity.

Cybersecurity information sharing depends on trust, and trust, in turn, depends on transparency.  The NSA, Cyber Command and other elements of the DOD operate in secrecy for good reasons.  But this secrecy also means that companies that share information with the government will not know what the government does with it.  Companies that provide services to the public will be particularly hard-pressed to explain why they share cyber threat information with the government and with NSA, and why their customers should be comfortable with such sharing, particularly in light of the NSA's record of unlawful and unconstitutional surveillance, including in the Terrorist Surveillance Program a few years ago.  The NSA recently stated that it couldn't even estimate how many Americans were swept up in intelligence surveillance that is supposed to be focused on non-U.S. Persons abroad, and which was authorized in the 2008 FISA Amendments Act.  Cloud providers to businesses are already worried about losing contracts to European firms over claims that the Patriot Act gives the U.S. government unwarranted access to information stored in the cloud.  If SECURE IT is adopted, cloud providers will have a hard time assuring companies abroad that their information will not be turned over to U.S. intelligence agencies and used for national security reasons unrelated to cybersecurity.  

Unlike the Lieberman-Collins bill and the Administration's own cybersecurity proposal, SECURE IT permits the NSA to use cyber threat information for national security purposes completely unrelated to cybersecurity.  Cyber threat information will often necessarily include personally identifiable information that can be used to attribute attacks to particular computers or people.  It is appropriate, in our view, for NSA to use this information for cybersecurity purposes – to protect against attacks on DOD and intelligence agency information systems, and to protect classified information systems in the private sector.  It is inappropriate, in our view, to put that information to unrelated uses, such as storing it in a huge data base and mining it for information to inform decisions about who to wiretap in the U.S., and whose data to collect with a super secret national security letter.

Some companies – particularly those defense contractors and others that are part of the Defense Industrial Base – already have cyber threat information sharing relationships with the NSA.  Claims that these relationships would be upset by a requirement of civilian control of cyber security information sharing in the new cybersecurity legislation are false.  Rather, the Lieberman-Collins bill specifically and explicitly preserves these relationships, and creates new information sharing authorities on top of those that already exist.

Finally, SECURE IT is fundamentally flawed because it allows information that private companies share with the government for cybersecurity reasons to be used for completely unrelated law enforcement purposes.  Information shared under SECURE IT can be used to prosecute tax fraud, immigration violations, creating fake ID's, and all of the other hundreds of crimes for which a wiretap order can be sought, and no warrant would be required in connection for any such use.  Because it authorizes these broad law enforcement and national security uses, and promotes the flow of information directly from companies to the NSA, SECURE IT is fundamentally flawed, and is not a viable alternative to the Lieberman-Collins bill.

II.  Modest Improvements In SECURE IT

The June 28 version of SECURE IT, S. 3342, made only modest improvements that do not address these fundamental flaws.  

Limiting, Slightly, the Breadth of Shared Information. As introduced, "cyber threat information" that could be shared under SECURE IT even if another law would protect the information included all information which "may be indicative of or describe[s]" a cyber attack or other threat. The new version of SECURE IT tightens the definition by requiring that the cyber threat information "indicate or describe" such threats and attacks.  This is a modest improvement.  However, the Lieberman-Collins bill is superior because it more narrowly defines the information that can be shared and requires that it be "reasonably necessary to describe" the threat.  That helps ensure that only true threat and attack information – and not everything else – is shared.  In this way, SECURE IT still falls short.  

Limiting the Breadth of Information Sharing Mandates Imposed On Contractors
As introduced, SECURE IT required government contractors to disclose cyber threat information they encountered if it was directly related to a government contract for cybersecurity, remote computing, or electronic communication services. It required such contractors to disclose this information even if they observed it on the network of another, non-governmental entity – a significant risk to privacy. No other leading cybersecurity bill, including CISPA and the Lieberman-Collins bill, mandates the sharing of threat information.  Such mandates undermine the public-private partnership that is essential to a successful cybersecurity program and create a risk of "oversharing" information at the expense of privacy.  The section was changed to require contractors to report only "significant cyber incidents" that a contractor discovers as a result of providing cybersecurity, remote computing or electronic communication service to the agency that would receive the report.  Since "incidents" are narrowly defined and would have to have occurred on agency's own network, the risk to privacy is minimized.  This provision was significantly improved.  It now essentially codifies what government agencies already require by contract:  that companies with which an agency entrusts its information tell the agency when a cyber incident compromises the information.  

Requiring Inspector General Review
The revised version of SECURE IT authorizes the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to review federal agency compliance with the information sharing procedures, and to consider in their review the need to protect privacy and civil liberties.  While this review is welcome, it compares poorly to the more robust, annual inspectors general reviews required in the Lieberman-Collins bill.  

III. Still a Back-Door Wiretap

Despite these modest improvements, SECURE IT still allows far too much information to flow to the government, allows information to flow directly from companies in the private sector to the NSA and other elements of the Department of Defense, and allows shared cyber threat information to be used for non-cybersecurity purposes such as national security and law enforcement. Much of this information would otherwise be protected from government access by the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. Bypassing the warrant requirement to facilitate intelligence and law enforcement investigative activity effectively turns cybersecurity information sharing into a back-door wiretap. The incremental, pro-privacy changes made to SECURE IT do not overcome these fundamental flaws in the legislation.

View the original article here

Struggling HTC promises better smartphones

The firm became a force in the industry by releasing a series of successful handsets for Google’s Android operating system.

In the last year however, the Taiwanese firm has come under pressure from rivals, who have introduced appealing new models more frequently. HTC’s latest devices, the Sensation XE and XL, are tweaked versions of relatively old designs, and appear to be struggling against Samsung’s Galaxy SII and Galaxy Nexus.

"Its industrial design hasn't changed for almost two years. Unless it launches a really different phone, it's hard to sell the product at a premium price," said Roxy Wong, analyst at Mirae Asset Management in Hong Kong.

Doubts over HTC’s strategy combined with a cut in its revenue forecast to cause a seven per cent tumble in its share price on Thursday. But today its finance chief Winston Yung dismissed the concerns.

“I don’t think it’s so serious,” he said. “We will focus on the product next year, better and more competitive.”

“Other than new LTE phones for the US market, we also have phones for the global market. We will launch some worldwide flagship products. We’re confident in them.”

HTC has also suffered in the technology industry's patent wars. Sales in Europe's largest market, Germany, could be blocked after the firm threw in the towel in a legal battle dating from early 2009.

"It won't be easy for HTC to get out of the mess it's in right now," said Simon Liu of Polaris Group. "Still, it's not the end of HTC. It's certainly not another Nokia. Nokia missed out on the smartphone market from the very beginning, and didn't develop applications as well as Apple."

Despite its troubles, analysts predict HTC will sell 45 million smartphones this year, compared to 25 million last year.

View the original article here

Unsure robots make better teachers than know-alls

Unsure robots make better teachers than know-alls - tech - 08 September 2012 - New Scientist@import "/css/gridmain.css"; @import "/css/article.css";@import "/css/comlist.css";@import "/data/images/ns/haas/haas.css";/* specific to this article view */#maincol {border-top:solid #A7A7A7 1px; padding-top:15px;}/* Basic commenting CSS*/.combx {margin:10px 0 0 0;padding:10px 20px 10px 10px;}#compnl {border-top:solid #A7A7A7 1px;}/* comment styles for article page only *//* form styles */#comform {margin:20px 50px 20px 10px;}#comform label{width: 90px;text-align: right;}#comform div.userhelp {margin:0 0 2px 115px;}#comform input.textinput, #comform textarea {width:300px;}#comform div.floatclear, #comformlogin div.floatclear {margin-bottom:10px;}#comform input#comcancel{margin:0 10px 0 0;}#comform input#compreview{margin:0 10px 0 0;}#comform textarea {height:95px;}#comformlogin {margin:20px 100px 20px 100px;}#comformlogin label{width: 120px;}#comformlogin input.textinput {width:150px;}#snv_tech a {background: url('/img/bg/snv_tech.jpg') no-repeat; color:#fff;}/* article social media */#sharebtns {width:440px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:20px; padding:15px 0 15px 10px; background:#F2F2F2;}#sharebtns div.floatleft {margin-right:10px;}#sharebtns .stumble {margin-top:1px;}.grpTools img {margin-right:8px; margin-top:9px;}#fblike {margin-top:41px;} Tech    Log in

EmailPassword Remember me

Your login is case sensitive

I have forgotten my password

Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens loginclose

My New ScientistHomeNewsIn-Depth ArticlesBlogsOpinionTVGalleriesTopic GuidesLast WordSubscribeDatingLook for Science JobsSPACETECHENVIRONMENTHEALTHLIFEPHYSICS&MATHSCIENCE IN SOCIETYCookies & Privacy

Home|Tech|News

Unsure robots make better teachers than know-alls08 September 2012 byDouglas HeavenMagazine issue 2881. Subscribe and saveFor similar stories, visit theRobotsTopic Guide THE best way to learn is to teach. That old maxim has been put to the test by a classroom robot that helps Japanese children learn English.

Shizuko Matsuzoe and Fumihide Tanaka at the University of Tsukuba, Japan, observed 19 children aged between 4 and 8 interacting with a humanoid robot. The children took part in a learning game in which they had to draw the shape corresponding to English words such as "circle", "square", "crescent" and "heart".

From a room next to the classroom, the researchers operated a French-built Nao robot so that it appeared weak and feeble, and encouraged the children to take on the role of carers. The robot also either behaved as an instructor, drawing the correct shape for the child, or made mistakes and acted as if it didn't know the answer.

When the robot got a shape wrong, the child could "teach" the robot how to draw it by guiding its hand. The robot then either "learned" the English word for that shape or continued to make errors.

Matsuzoe and Tanaka found that the children did best when the robot appeared to learn from them. This also made the children more likely to want to continue learning with the robot. They will present their results at the Ro-Man conference in Paris this month.

New ScientistNot just a website!Subscribe to New Scientist and get:New Scientist magazine delivered every weekUnlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issuesSubscribe Now and SaveIf you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.

email:password:Remember me  

Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article

Subscribe now to comment.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

ADVERTISEMENT

MoreLatest newsFBI launches $1 billion face recognition project10:12 07 September 2012

The Next Generation Identification programme will include a nationwide database of criminal faces and other biometrics

Up, up and away: Chimeric bicycles take to the skies10:03 07 September 2012

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's the start of a new extreme sport – pedal-powered flying

AI cyber-fighter: does it feel human, punk?11:21 06 September 2012

A software bot designed to act human by mimicking consciousness is poised to go into battle in the Unreal Tournament arena

Tough, super-stretchy gel could make better implants10:30 06 September 2012

A new water-based gel is one of the stretchiest materials yet made, and it is durable enough to offer hope for better medical implants

see all related stories

MoreLatest newsNot so moist Mars: Clays may come from lava, not lakes18:00 09 September 2012

Some ancient clays on the Red Planet are a better match to volcanic flows than water-crafted minerals – hurting the likelihood of conditions for early life

Muscles that do nothing can keep you warm and thin18:00 09 September 2012

Muscles can burn energy without contracting, thanks to sarcolipins – proteins that could shed light on the body's thermostat and how we shed excess fat

A genetic blueprint of your unborn baby10:00 08 September 2012

Sequencing the whole genome of a fetus could provide a medical early warning on a previously unknown scale - but it also brings dilemmas, says Harriet A. Washington

Catcher of elusive neutrinos takes shape at Fermilab18:26 07 September 2012

Huge plastic blocks were being set in place this week to help catch some of the most elusive, mysterious particles known

see all latest news

Most readMost commented FBI launches $1 billion face recognition project Space-time ripples record black hole crashes Evolution could explain the placebo effect 13 things that do not make sense Acupuncture treatment is not as safe as advertised Most readMost commented Destroying the powerful and destructive race construct If 2013 breaks heat record, how will deniers respond? Hail Jeremy Hunt, the new minister for magic Up, up and away: Chimeric bicycles take to the skies Food for thought: Eat your way to dementia TWITTERNew Scientist is on Twitter

Get the latest from New Scientist: sign up to our Twitter feed

LATEST JOBS SRG: Clinical Project Physician - Switzerland Paramount Recruitment: C# Software Engineer / Software Developer - .NET Paramount Recruitment: Editorial Manager - Agency with Fantastic Working Environment MedImmune: Scientist II - Virology (MSAT) SEC Recruitment: CRA-SCRA This week's issueSubscribe

For exclusive news and expert analysis, subscribe to New Scientist.

Gain full online accessCurrent issue contentContent of past issues08 September 2012

ADVERTISEMENT

Back to top

Login

EmailPassword Remember me

Your login is case sensitive

I have forgotten my password

Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens loginclose

About usNew ScientistSyndicationRecruitment AdvertisingStaff at New ScientistAdvertiseRBI JobsUser HelpContact UsFAQ / HelpDisclaimerTs & CsCookiesPrivacy PolicySubscriptionsSubscribeRenewGift subscriptionMy accountBack issuesCustomer ServiceLinksSite MapBrowse all articlesMagazine archiveNewScientistJobsThe LastWordRSS FeedsOnline StoreAndroid AppMobile site homeScience JobsBiology JobsChemistry JobsClinical JobsSales JobsEarth & Environment JobsEngineering JobsMaths & IT JobsGraduate Jobs© Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.

View the original article here

Tough, super-stretchy gel could make better implants

Tough, super-stretchy gel could make better implants - tech - 06 September 2012 - New Scientist@import "/css/gridmain.css"; @import "/css/article.css";@import "/css/comlist.css";@import "/data/images/ns/haas/haas.css";/* specific to this article view */#maincol {border-top:solid #A7A7A7 1px; padding-top:15px;}/* Basic commenting CSS*/.combx {margin:10px 0 0 0;padding:10px 20px 10px 10px;}#compnl {border-top:solid #A7A7A7 1px;}/* comment styles for article page only *//* form styles */#comform {margin:20px 50px 20px 10px;}#comform label{width: 90px;text-align: right;}#comform div.userhelp {margin:0 0 2px 115px;}#comform input.textinput, #comform textarea {width:300px;}#comform div.floatclear, #comformlogin div.floatclear {margin-bottom:10px;}#comform input#comcancel{margin:0 10px 0 0;}#comform input#compreview{margin:0 10px 0 0;}#comform textarea {height:95px;}#comformlogin {margin:20px 100px 20px 100px;}#comformlogin label{width: 120px;}#comformlogin input.textinput {width:150px;}#snv_tech a {background: url('/img/bg/snv_tech.jpg') no-repeat; color:#fff;}/* article social media */#sharebtns {width:440px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:20px; padding:15px 0 15px 10px; background:#F2F2F2;}#sharebtns div.floatleft {margin-right:10px;}#sharebtns .stumble {margin-top:1px;}.grpTools img {margin-right:8px; margin-top:9px;}#fblike {margin-top:41px;} Tech    Log in

EmailPassword Remember me

Your login is case sensitive

I have forgotten my password

Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens loginclose

My New ScientistHomeNewsIn-Depth ArticlesBlogsOpinionTVGalleriesTopic GuidesLast WordSubscribeDatingLook for Science JobsSPACETECHENVIRONMENTHEALTHLIFEPHYSICS&MATHSCIENCE IN SOCIETYCookies & Privacy

Home|Tech|Health|News

Tough, super-stretchy gel could make better implants06 September 2012Magazine issue 2881. Subscribe and save LOOK out, Mr Fantastic: there's a new creation in town that is super-stretchy and ultra-strong, despite being 90 per cent water.

The material is a hydrogel, an artificial substance that has similar properties to many tissues in the human body. Familiar to many as soft contact lenses, hydrogels have also been used as wound dressings or cartilage replacement.

There is a limiting factor: "Most hydrogels are brittle, like tofu or Jell-O," says Zhigang Suo of Harvard University. "To be used in the body, hydrogels have to be flexible and tough."

Suo and colleagues created their substance by mixing two polymers each crosslinked with different types of chemical bonds. The resulting hybrid gel can stretch to more than 20 times its original length and still bounce back into shape (Nature, doi: 10.1038/nature11409).

Other hydrogels have been made about as stretchy, but they rip easily if they suffer small tears.

"It's like the rubber of a balloon," says Suo. "If you cut a small hole in it and then try to stretch it, the hole will get bigger and the rubber will break."

Even when slightly torn, the new gel can stretch to around 17 times its original length before it tears. The team thinks this toughness may be due to the gel's hybrid nature.

Costantino Creton at ESPCI ParisTech in France, says the hydrogel has the best balance of properties yet, as well as being easy to make: "It shows promise where you need something soft and flexible but also durable."

New ScientistNot just a website!Subscribe to New Scientist and get:New Scientist magazine delivered every weekUnlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issuesSubscribe Now and SaveIf you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.

email:password:Remember me  

Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article

Subscribe now to comment.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Taking the strain (Image: Jeong-Yun Sun)

ADVERTISEMENT

MoreLatest newsFBI launches $1 billion face recognition project10:12 07 September 2012

The Next Generation Identification programme will include a nationwide database of criminal faces and other biometrics

Up, up and away: Chimeric bicycles take to the skies10:03 07 September 2012

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's the start of a new extreme sport – pedal-powered flying

AI cyber-fighter: does it feel human, punk?11:21 06 September 2012

A software bot designed to act human by mimicking consciousness is poised to go into battle in the Unreal Tournament arena

Obama's 2025 car fuel efficiency goals are already in reach11:56 05 September 2012

By 2025, all US cars must achieve 54.5 miles per gallon. Sounds tough, but much of the technology needed already exists

see all related stories

MoreLatest newsFBI launches $1 billion face recognition project10:12 07 September 2012

The Next Generation Identification programme will include a nationwide database of criminal faces and other biometrics

Up, up and away: Chimeric bicycles take to the skies10:03 07 September 2012

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's the start of a new extreme sport – pedal-powered flying

Astrophile: Lucky strike turns a dark cloud into a star18:57 06 September 2012

A "bullet" is hitting the inky cloud Barnard 68, which means it could offer one of the best views yet of the earliest stage of star formation

Acupuncture treatment is not as safe as advertised18:44 06 September 2012

The author of the first study into the side effects of acupuncture says the findings suggest the risks may outweigh any benefits

see all latest news

Most readMost commented Evolution could explain the placebo effect Hail Jeremy Hunt, the new minister for magic Silent Spring didn't condemn millions to death The ever deepening mystery of the human genome Voyager 1: reports of my exit are greatly exaggerated Most readMost commented Organic food: no better for you, or the planet Hail Jeremy Hunt, the new minister for magic If 2013 breaks heat record, how will deniers respond? Can we live without free will? Could we geoengineer the climate with CO2? TWITTERNew Scientist is on Twitter

Get the latest from New Scientist: sign up to our Twitter feed

LATEST JOBS AstraZeneca US: Controls Engineer/Sr. Controls Engineer AstraZeneca US: Pharmaceutical Sales Specialist - EQ PC1 - Zanesville, OH AstraZeneca US: Pharmaceutical Sales Specialist - PM PT1 - York, PA AstraZeneca US: Pharmaceutical Sales Specialist - CC PCOV1 - Union, NJ AstraZeneca US: Pharmaceutical Sales Specialist - MM DOV1 - Anchorage, AK This week's issueSubscribe

For exclusive news and expert analysis, subscribe to New Scientist.

Gain full online accessCurrent issue contentContent of past issues08 September 2012

ADVERTISEMENT

Back to top

Login

EmailPassword Remember me

Your login is case sensitive

I have forgotten my password

Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens loginclose

About usNew ScientistSyndicationRecruitment AdvertisingStaff at New ScientistAdvertiseRBI JobsUser HelpContact UsFAQ / HelpDisclaimerTs & CsCookiesPrivacy PolicySubscriptionsSubscribeRenewGift subscriptionMy accountBack issuesCustomer ServiceLinksSite MapBrowse all articlesMagazine archiveNewScientistJobsThe LastWordRSS FeedsOnline StoreAndroid AppMobile site homeScience JobsBiology JobsChemistry JobsClinical JobsSales JobsEarth & Environment JobsEngineering JobsMaths & IT JobsGraduate Jobs© Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.

View the original article here

Buzzing clothes could teach you to be a better athlete

View the original article here

Unsure robots make better teachers than know-alls

Unsure robots make better teachers than know-alls - tech - 31 August 2012 - New Scientist@import "/css/gridmain.css"; @import "/css/article.css";@import "/css/comlist.css";@import "/data/images/ns/haas/haas.css";/* specific to this article view */#maincol {border-top:solid #A7A7A7 1px; padding-top:15px;}/* Basic commenting CSS*/.combx {margin:10px 0 0 0;padding:10px 20px 10px 10px;}#compnl {border-top:solid #A7A7A7 1px;}/* comment styles for article page only *//* form styles */#comform {margin:20px 50px 20px 10px;}#comform label{width: 90px;text-align: right;}#comform div.userhelp {margin:0 0 2px 115px;}#comform input.textinput, #comform textarea {width:300px;}#comform div.floatclear, #comformlogin div.floatclear {margin-bottom:10px;}#comform input#comcancel{margin:0 10px 0 0;}#comform input#compreview{margin:0 10px 0 0;}#comform textarea {height:95px;}#comformlogin {margin:20px 100px 20px 100px;}#comformlogin label{width: 120px;}#comformlogin input.textinput {width:150px;}#snv_tech a {background: url('/img/bg/snv_tech.jpg') no-repeat; color:#fff;}/* article social media */#sharebtns {width:440px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:20px; padding:15px 0 15px 10px; background:#F2F2F2;}#sharebtns div.floatleft {margin-right:10px;}#sharebtns .stumble {margin-top:1px;}.grpTools img {margin-right:8px; margin-top:9px;}#fblike {margin-top:41px;} Tech    Log in

EmailPassword Remember me

Your login is case sensitive

I have forgotten my password

Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens loginclose

My New ScientistHomeNewsIn-Depth ArticlesBlogsOpinionTVGalleriesTopic GuidesLast WordSubscribeDatingLook for Science JobsSPACETECHENVIRONMENTHEALTHLIFEPHYSICS&MATHSCIENCE IN SOCIETYCookies & Privacy

Home|Tech|News

Unsure robots make better teachers than know-alls16:41 31 August 2012 byDouglas HeavenFor similar stories, visit theRobotsTopic Guide The best way to learn is to teach. Now a classroom robot that helps Japanese children learn English has put that old maxim to the test.

Shizuko Matsuzoe and Fumihide Tanaka at the University of Tsukuba, Japan, set up an experiment to find out how different levels of competence in a robot teacher affected children's success in learning English words for shapes.

They observed how 19 children aged between 4 and 8 interacted with a humanoid Nao robot in a learning game in which each child had to draw the shape that corresponded to an English word such as 'circle', 'square', 'crescent', or 'heart'.

The researchers operated the robot from a room next to the classroom so that it appeared weak and feeble, and the children were encouraged to take on the role of carers. The robot could then either act as an instructor, drawing the correct shape for the child, or make mistakes and act as if it didn't know the answer.

When the robot got a shape wrong, the child could teach the robot how to draw it correctly by guiding its hand. The robot then either "learned" the English word for that shape or continued to make mistakes.

Robot learner aids learning Matsuzoe and Tanaka found that the children did best when the robot appeared to learn from them. This also made the children more likely to want to continue learning with the robot. The researchers will present their results at Ro-Man - an international symposium on robot and human interactive communication - in September.

"Anything that gets a person more actively engaged and motivated is going to be beneficial to the learning process," says Andrea Thomaz , director of the Socially Intelligent Machines lab at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. "So needing to teach the robot is a great way of doing that."

The idea of students learning by teaching also agrees with a lot of research in human social learning, she says. The process of teaching a robot is akin to what happens in peer-to-peer learning, where students teach each other or work in groups to learn concepts – common activities in most classrooms.

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.

email:password:Remember me  

Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article

Subscribe now to comment.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Things work best when teacher doesn't know best (Image: Sinopix/Rex Features)

ADVERTISEMENT

MoreLatest newsWaste water harnessed to make electricity and plastics09:00 03 September 2012

The treatment of waste water can be used to create energy and biodegradable plastics

Bendy battery lets you wear gadgets' power supply11:08 30 August 2012

Flexible battery design lets you wear your gadget's power source on the wrist, neck or any part of the body you fancy

Let's get lost: Apps that help you wander to happiness08:00 30 August 2012

From GPS to book recommendations, technology is eradicating uncertainty from life. But what if happiness depends on taking chances?

Visual programming means anyone can be a coder10:00 29 August 2012

Coding by tweaking on-screen shapes and drawings could revolutionise computer programming, making it accessible to all

see all related stories

MoreLatest newsMoon's magnetic umbrellas may shield future spaceships18:43 03 September 2012

New insights into lunar anomalies could inspire deflector shields for spaceships that would protect astronauts against solar storms

Today on New Scientist: 3 September 201218:00 03 September 2012

All today's stories on newscientist.com, including: stem cells return some feeling to paralysed patients, satellite images of Brazil's ravaged rainforests, the ultimate food scare, and more

Retracing the stardust trail17:34 03 September 2012

In The Stardust Revolution, Jacob Berkowitz explains how stars have shaped the universe and asks if we may soon discover life outside the solar system

Brain diabetes: the ultimate food scare15:51 03 September 2012

Big trouble lies ahead if Alzheimer's is proven to be a form of diabetes

see all latest news

Most readMost commented Epigenetics gives clues to human cancer susceptibility Two dead stars provide low-tech way to test Einstein Rosacea may be caused by mite faeces in your pores Mirrors take root in pitch-black nanotube forest Protein discovery could lead to 'genomic debuggers' Most readMost commented Fracking could be combined with carbon capture plans Rosacea may be caused by mite faeces in your pores Big burn theory: Why humans spontaneously combust Bonobo genius makes stone tools like early humans did Food for thought: Eat your way to dementia TWITTERNew Scientist is on Twitter

Get the latest from New Scientist: sign up to our Twitter feed

LATEST JOBS PIC: Laboratory Technician SEC Recruitment: Senior Statistical Programmers | Perm | UK or Germany SEC Recruitment: Senior Lead Programmer |Germany |Global Company Meet Recruitment: Regulatory Affairs Publisher, Vienna Meet Recruitment: Fantastic Senior Regulatory Affairs function @ top Pharma, Berks/Bucks This week's issueSubscribe

For exclusive news and expert analysis, subscribe to New Scientist.

Gain full online accessCurrent issue contentContent of past issues01 September 2012

ADVERTISEMENT

Back to top

Login

EmailPassword Remember me

Your login is case sensitive

I have forgotten my password

Register nowActivate my subscriptionInstitutional loginAthens loginclose

About usNew ScientistSyndicationRecruitment AdvertisingStaff at New ScientistAdvertiseRBI JobsUser HelpContact UsFAQ / HelpDisclaimerTs & CsCookiesPrivacy PolicySubscriptionsSubscribeRenewGift subscriptionMy accountBack issuesCustomer ServiceLinksSite MapBrowse all articlesMagazine archiveNewScientistJobsThe LastWordRSS FeedsOnline StoreAndroid AppMobile site homeScience JobsBiology JobsChemistry JobsClinical JobsSales JobsEarth & Environment JobsEngineering JobsMaths & IT JobsGraduate Jobs© Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.

View the original article here