Delay is not Delilah*: My Placement with Digital Catapult

post by Favour Borokini (2022 cohort)

I officially began my placement with Digital Catapult, or DC, as rather affectionately I think, it is referred to by Digital Catapult staff and me, eventually, now, in April 2023. Although the Horizon CDT Placement is meant to take place over the course of three months, there is quite a lot of flexibility regarding its duration and structure. In my case, my key contact at my Industry Partner, Dr Aki Jaarvinen, was of the view that my research would greatly benefit from a two-part placement since I was so early in my research. I would spend a month visiting DC offices in London between May to June 2023, familiarising myself with the DC team and their work, especially the Immersive team and then, as my research progressed, return in December through March 2024 to complete the rest of the placement having learnt in the first part, how best suited DC would be to support my research and give me the opportunity to learn what life in the industry was like. 

My PhD with the Horizon CDT wasn’t my first time engaging with DC though. Back when I was in Nigeria and working in tech policy research, I had come across a LinkedIn vacancy for a Responsible AI Ethics Officer position at the organisation that I was highly interested in and tried to apply for and in a bid to learn more about the role and DC, I got in touch with Cecilia Nunn, a member of the DC AI Ethics team. Unfortunately, due to certain visa restrictions, I was ineligible for the position – visa restrictions being a rather remarkably persistent thorn in my flesh, ever since I began to work in international tech policy research. 

When some months after this interaction, Andrea confirmed to me over Teams, while I wondered if it was really happening, with my primary supervisor, that she would be issuing my Letter of Acceptance, I perhaps misunderstood what she meant about the industry partner as I interpreted something she said to mean that my admission was contingent on finding an industry partner to support my research. 

I made a long list of potential industry partners, organisations working in VR or technology policy and similarly related spaces and sent lots of cold emails. Some people responded, usually positively but the vast majority did not. One of the latter was Digital Catapult, or so I thought. What had happened was that Cecilia forwarded my email to Aki, who as a technologist is involved with the Immersive Lab activities and who, I suppose found my research interesting enough at the time and emailed me, and the rest is history. Some other visa application issues meant that I wouldn’t actually meet Aki in person or visit Digital Catapult till April the following year.  

Beginning the Placement 

When I first visited DC, I was struck by quite a number of things. There was the view, of course, through which one could watch Londoners milling ant-like between DC and the towering buildings on one side and the architectural marvel that was the British Library on the other. The offices themselves were quite airy and brightly lit, which I am fairly certain in no small way contributed to the overall friendliness of the team as I mentioned to Dr Oliver Butler, my primary supervisor, DC felt like a great place to work. This feeling would come to be validated several times during my placement, as I observed how tightly-knit and warm the Immersive Lab team and other teams interacted amongst themselves and with me. 

During the first part of my placement, I was introduced to the team including Kerwyn Dyte, the Immersive Lab Manager, Rachel Thuo, a Junior Technologist with the Immersive Team, and Jessica Driscoll, the DC’s Director of Immersive and participated in a number of activities at the lab that got me thinking about some of the ways immersive technologies can remarkably transform our lives. Some of my ideas were admittedly, rather comical(ly dystopian) – plastic surgeons for avatars/digital twins for instance, mind uploading for exercise purposes (drawing from former Horizon CDT student, Dr Angela Thornton’s research) but working with the team and merely observing their sparked my more imaginative side. Rachel and Kerwyn strongly encouraged me to watch Dark Mirror. 

Inside a room with graphic design project being displayed on a large screen

Inside a room with graphic design project being displayed on a large screen
Exploring Virtual Human Creation

DC’s position as a member of the UK Catapult network meant they interacted with a huge number of stakeholders including policymakers and stakeholders, such that by the end of the first part of the placement, it became quite apparent to us that it would be in our mutual interest for me to hold a series of workshops relying on their network and support.

When I began my research, and what perhaps prompted the introduction to Aki, my interests were specifically geared towards creating an ethics framework for virtual reality harms, however as my research progressed, I quickly realised that what I was most interested in were avatars and afrofeminist ethics concerns in their design and use. This change thankfully did not prove too challenging to my industry partner, and with their assistance and support, I successfully organised three workshops with over 20 participants in London and Bristol between December to June.

five people standing together with CDT student, Favour Borokini, in the centre
Final Placement day

Lessons Learnt

There were quite a few distinctions between the industry and academic approach. For one, academic research proceeds much slower and I sometimes had to juggle required modules within the CDT and Law school, sometimes missing a couple. Ethics approval requirements meant that I couldn’t run workshops as quickly as I hoped and I was often quite surprised at the speed the Immersive Lab team worked, often beginning and wrapping several projects seemingly at light speed. To work with the very busy people at DC, I had to strike a balance, sometimes needing to write module convenors to be excused on certain days, a skill I think every multitasker should have. I also quickly realised that note taking was very important to keep track of all that needed to be done, so I recorded my industry partner supervision meetings with my primary supervisor dutifully as well.

I was also constantly floored and humbled by the DC team’s interest in my research and their willingness to give up their time and resources and the invitations to participate in various internal and external networking and knowledge-sharing events from Jessie and Aki and occasionally team members I had never even met. It has often been observed that workplaces that refer to themselves as families often turn out to be the farthest thing from family, but somehow, despite not ever once in my hearing referring to themselves as family, DC turned out to be a really interesting place to work.

Perhaps most importantly, working with DC and DC’s network helped me re-engage with the ludic element of technology design and meet with real people across the industry who want to create pleasurable, diverse experiences. I think very often in the tech policy and responsible innovation, elements of escapism and pleasure and leisure (pleisure?) get overlooked and ignored in favour of concepts like justice and equity. But what justice without fantasy and speculation and futurism and fun? My conversations with the team and Rachel especially have motivated me to take an interest in why people love and are interested in immersive technologies, beyond simply designing an ethics toolkit for better design.

Favour and Rachel taking a selfie
With Rachel after a networking event

Aki’s definition of the metaverse as an imaginary and narrative of different types of technologies and interfaces of a futuristic type of digital interaction is probably the best, most wholesome definition of a space it is rather de jour to deride.

PS

In July, I visited DC again to return a headset I had been loaned by the Lab and spoke with Kerwyn about working with DC again as my research continues to progress. I hope the opportunity arises again. I’m really thankful to Kerwyn, Rachel, Jessie, Aki, Iulia, Nicole, Chris, and Chris, (there are two Chrises!), as well as Cecelia and Chanell, for speaking to me about and supporting my research.

* Delay is not Delilah is a humorous Nigerian perjoration of the phrase, “Delay is not denial”.

Bridging AI and Oral Healthcare: My Placement with Haleon PLC

post by Muhammad Suhaib Shahid (2020 cohort)

  1. Introduction to My Placement Experience

In the summer of 2024, I embarked on a placement with Haleon PLC in Nottingham, as part of my doctoral research with the Horizon Centre for Doctoral Training (CDT). The placement was an incredible opportunity to merge my interests in artificial intelligence (AI) and healthcare, specifically focusing on oral health. Over the course of three months, I engaged in two primary projects: conducting interviews with industry professionals about AI in oral healthcare and collecting dual-modal data involving MRI scans and facial video recordings. This placement not only enriched my research and contributed towards my thesis, but also provided valuable insights into the practical applications and challenges of integrating AI into healthcare.

  1. Part One: Exploring AI in Oral Healthcare Through Interviews

2.1 Initiating Conversations with Industry Experts

The first phase of my placement involved conducting in-depth interviews with professionals at Haleon PLC. The goal was to understand the current landscape, perceptions, and future possibilities of AI in oral healthcare. I interviewed eight participants from various departments, including Innovation, Regulatory Affairs, and Medical and Scientific Affairs. Each participant brought unique perspectives based on their roles within the company.

2.2 Key Themes and Insights

The interviews were structured around several key themes:

  • Understanding of AI in Oral Healthcare: We discussed how AI is currently being utilised in dentistry and oral health, including diagnostic tools, patient engagement platforms, and personalised treatment planning.
  • Ethical Considerations: Participants shared their thoughts on the ethical implications of AI, such as data privacy, patient consent, and algorithmic bias. These discussions highlighted the importance of transparency and trust in implementing AI solutions.
  • Impact on Professional Roles: A significant topic was how AI might change the roles of dental professionals. While some saw AI as a tool to enhance efficiency and accuracy, others were cautious about over-reliance on technology.
  • Optimism vs. Skepticism: The interviews revealed a mix of optimism and skepticism. While there was excitement about AI’s potential to revolutionise oral healthcare, concerns were raised about practical barriers and the readiness of the industry to adopt such technologies.

2.3 Analysing the Data

After conducting the interviews, I performed a thematic analysis to identify patterns and key insights. Using Excel, I organised the transcripts and coded the data, which allowed me to draw meaningful conclusions that would later inform my thesis. This process was invaluable in understanding the multifaceted views on AI within the industry and provided a solid foundation for further research.

  1. Part Two: MRI Data Collection for AI Modelling

3.1 The Need for Dual-Modal Data

The second part of my placement focused on collecting dual-modal data to advance AI modelling in speech and oral movements. The aim was to create a dataset that combined internal views of the vocal tract (using MRI scans) with external facial movements (captured through video recordings). This data is crucial for developing AI models that can predict internal articulatory configurations based on external facial cues—a concept with significant implications for non-invasive diagnostics in oral healthcare.

3.2 Data Collection Process in Nottingham

3.2.1 Methodology

In the initial ethics application, we aimed to recruit 30 participants for the study. Each participant would undergo two recording sessions at facilities in Nottingham:

  • Session One: Participants were recorded speaking and chewing in front of a camera, capturing high-resolution videos of their facial movements as they articulated specific sentences.
  • Session Two: The same participants repeated the sentences while undergoing MRI scans. This provided real-time images of their internal vocal tract movements corresponding to the facial videos.

We later found that the upright MRI machine would allow us to simultaneously record the face and the internal view. We subsequently focused our efforts on this approach and did not implement session one; for the placement, we focused on performing an initial pilot study to refine the protocol.

3.2.2 The Pilot Study with Multiple MRI Machines

The pilot study involved two participants using two different MRI machines:

  • 1.5T Scanner: Offered a balance between image quality and participant comfort.
  • 0.5T Upright Scanner: Allowed participants to speak in a more natural, upright position, improving comfort and potentially leading to more natural speech patterns.

3.3.1 Adapting Procedures for Each Machine

Each MRI machine had unique requirements. For instance, the upright scanner necessitated adjustments in our data collection protocol to accommodate the participants’ posture. We also shortened the sentences used during the pilot to reduce the time participants needed to speak while being scanned, minimising discomfort and movement artifacts.

The pilot study was instrumental in understanding how different MRI technologies could impact data quality and participant experience. It highlighted the importance of selecting appropriate equipment based on the research objectives and provided valuable lessons for future large-scale data collection efforts.

  1. Reflections on the Placement Experience

This placement was a unique opportunity to apply theoretical knowledge in a practical setting. Working with Haleon PLC allowed me to see firsthand how AI concepts could be translated into real-world applications, particularly in oral healthcare.

Throughout the placement, I was constantly mindful of ethical considerations, such as obtaining informed consent and ensuring data privacy. The experience underscored the complexities of implementing AI solutions in healthcare, where patient welfare and ethical integrity are paramount.

Collaborating with professionals from various disciplines enriched my understanding and expanded my professional network. It was inspiring to engage with individuals who are at the forefront of innovation in healthcare.

  1. Conclusion and Acknowledgments

My placement with Haleon PLC in Nottingham was a great experience that significantly contributed to my doctoral research. The combination of conducting interviews and collecting dual-modal MRI data provided a comprehensive perspective on the challenges and opportunities of integrating AI into oral healthcare.

I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to the team at Haleon PLC for their support and collaboration. Special appreciation goes to the participants who generously contributed their time and insights. This experience has not only advanced my research but also solidified my commitment to contributing to the field of AI in healthcare.

 

Navigating Imaginary Landscapes: My Placement with Makers of Imaginary Worlds

post by Pavlos Panagiotidis (2022 cohort)

My placement with Makers of Imaginary Worlds took place in various locations around Nottingham and remotely.

Starting date: 25/06/2023
End Date: 25/09/2023

During the past summer, I had the opportunity to participate in a three-month placement with Makers of Imaginary Worlds, a company that combines art and technology in innovative ways to create experiences for children and families. I worked on a number of projects during my time there, which helped me gain a better understanding of the practical implications of engaging audiences in mixed reality experiences, as well as the potential for research in the intersection of HCI and performance.

During my placement, I was presented with several opportunities to work on projects that involved immersive technologies, approaching audience engagement, and experimenting with prototype technologies for performance. These projects, located in various parts of Nottingham, posed diverse challenges that made the experience exciting and solidified my interest in the intersection of art and technology. This placement helped me refocus my research objectives towards areas likely to have practical impacts. These areas include developing innovative methods to assess audience engagement through computer vision and creating methodologies to evaluate the aesthetic implications of emerging technologies in performance-making.

One project I worked on involved the qualitative analysis of interviews with visitors to the “Home Zero” art installation. This installation was designed to encourage participants, mainly children and families, to envision a more sustainable future through a playful, interactive experience that used paintings from the National Gallery as a starting point. I cleaned the data and performed a preliminary analysis of interview transcripts to study how audiences interacted with and perceived the installation. My analysis showed evidence that visitors enjoyed engaging with tangible interfaces and hands-on interactions, which made the experience more engaging and effectively supported the learning process. Later that year, I co-authored a paper that transformed some preliminary insights into a study on the significance of tangibility in designing mixed reality experiences about environmental sustainability for children. I also had the opportunity to contribute to another academic paper based on “Home Zero”, which aims to provide bridges between the disciplines of theatre and computer science, exploring how these fields can converge to enhance participatory design.

An example of an interesting field observation was when a child participant in HomeZero used the “Imagination Scanner,” a device that supposedly measured the participant’s imaginative capacity. The child’s excitement was palpable when they scored higher than their parents, and the automated system rewarded them by opening the door to the next part of the installation. This moment highlighted how design and technology could invert typical familial hierarchies, providing a unique and empowering experience for the children involved.

During my placement, I also had the opportunity to engage closely with “The Delights,” an event that blended dance, sensory activities, and interactive installations to captivate its young audience at the Hoopla Festival, which was held in Nottingham’s local parks. My role involved interviewing families to document their experiences and synthesising this information into a detailed report for stakeholders such as the festival committee. This report not only showcased the high level of audience engagement but also underscored the event’s impact on community connection, child development, and the creative transformation of public spaces. I gained valuable experience in the process required by funders to collect and analyse data and report the outcomes of publicly funded events to justify subsidising an art-making company.

Evidently, the event transformed perceptions of local parks from mere recreational spaces to vibrant community hubs that facilitate child development, artistic expression, and community bonding. Interviews with parents revealed significant shifts in how these spaces are viewed and utilised, emphasising the parks’ new roles as sites for creative and interactive family engagement. Notably, parents appreciated how the event encouraged their children’s expressive skills and social interactions, with many noting increased confidence and communication in their children due to participating in the activities offered. The experience showed me the importance of audience insights in designing experiences. Understanding audience behaviour, expectations, and engagement can be crucial in creating successful events. My placement’s most technically challenging aspect was working on a computer vision-based audience participation assessing prototype. This project aimed to collect and analyse data regarding audience behaviour in interactive installations and explore the possibilities of using computer vision technology to refine interactive artistic experiences.

During my placement at MOIW, I gained a deeper understanding of how my backgrounds in theatre, physics, and computer science synergistically apply to mixed reality experiences. The diverse approaches include assessing audience engagement, designing for optimal user experiences, performing qualitative and quantitative data analysis, and exploring the potential of physical and technological prototypes in performance. While being a “jack of all trades and master of none” can pose challenges in pinpointing one’s exact skills, it also allows for unique involvement and contribution to artistic projects.

Further reflecting on interdisciplinary approaches, I recognised that while the potential for convergence between computer science and theatre is evident, the independent evolution of these disciplines has occasionally made collaboration challenging. However, this placement reinforced my belief in the value of interdisciplinary research and the potential to bridge gaps between these fields, making designing each mixed reality performance a valuable step toward this integration.

In general, my placement with Makers of Imaginary Worlds was a valuable experience that enhanced my understanding of immersive technologies and audience engagement in a real-world setting. It solidified my commitment to exploring the intersection of art and technology, paving the way for my future work in the field. Thanks to my placement, I developed a deeper understanding of the intersection of HCI and performance, both academically and practically. I learned that collaboration and interdisciplinary research are crucial in creating and studying mixed reality events. Mixed reality requires a blend of skills and knowledge, including art, technology, and design. Therefore, processes that support interdisciplinary collaboration are essential in creating innovative mixed-reality experiences.

Exploring Children’s Interaction with Robotic Installations: Reflections on Placement with Makers of Imaginary Worlds

post by Victor Ngo (2022 cohort)

My placement ran from July to September 2023, with Makers of Imaginary Worlds (MOIW), and involved planning and running a two-part study that would help inform my PhD research on ‘Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Live Creative Installations’. More specifically, how children interact and form relationships with the robotic installation, how children understand and shape their interaction in this context, what meaning children attribute to the robot and their interaction, how curious children are during the interaction and what motivates their curiosity.

NED (The Never-Ending Dancer)

To add some background to my placement partner, MOIW are a Nottingham-based art company, who aim to create interactive and sensory experiences where children can play, engage and explore. MOIW’s first live robotics project, Thingamabobas, is aimed at younger audiences and involves the use of a computer vision-equipped robot arm, called NED (The Never-Ending Dancer), which can detect audience members and interact with them autonomously. This installation also includes a series of mechanical circus-like creations that are designed to enable children to interact with them as imaginative, dynamic sculptures that provide novel, enjoyable, and empowering experiences.

Unlike social robots, industrial robot arms typically have a functional design, void of humanoid features or facial expressions. MOIW aims to transform the industrial robot arm into a playful kinetic sculpture that defies expectations, offering an inventive interpretation. By introducing variables such as costume design, musical accompaniment, and contextual storytelling, the artists aim to redefine the perception of the robotic arm. Demonstrating how fiction can facilitate a willing suspension of disbelief among audiences, allowing viewers to trust and immerse themselves in reimagining a new reality.

The Study:

The first half of the study, part 1, was completed at the National Festival of Making, Blackburn, with a tremendous number of people attending and in general a great event! This half of the study explored the audience’s understanding of the initial robotic system, with no changes to the system’s capabilities or functionality. This allowed for a base understanding of its performance, capabilities, and limitations in the wild for a researcher new to the system, this proved extremely useful and provided me with the knowledge necessary to complete part 2. The second half of the study, part 2, was completed at the Mansfield Museum, Mansfield, exploring the same audience understanding, however, the system was altered to allow for 360-degree motion around the robot’s base as well as a different method of detecting the audience, moving to body pose detection from facial recognition. Although a direct comparison between the two studies is not possible, insights into audience responsiveness, engagement, and enjoyment are all possible and valuable to the discussion, and future development of this system or similar systems.

Reflections:

Over the course of three months, this placement has provided me with the opportunity to develop key interpersonal and professional skills, as well as improve my technical aptitude.

My initial discussions with MOIW for the placement were straight away met with enthusiasm and sometimes whimsical imagination from Roma Patel and Rachel Ramchurn, the artists of MOIW. Despite MOIW being a relatively small company, I was fortunate enough to learn the ins and outs of art installation production and how artists like Roma and Rachel turn ideas and imagination into professional productions, and how they deal with issues, changes and unexpected setbacks. Shadowing them allowed me to observe how they manage large-scale projects and interact with professional organisations. This has enabled me to further develop and improve my own understanding of professional engagement and project management.

Throughout all stages of the placement, the artists from MOIW frequently discussed possible alterations and upgrades with me to improve the interaction capabilities of the robot. Here I was able to apply and improve my technical experience, developing solutions to enhance the robot’s interaction capabilities or increase the system’s audience detection accuracy and reliability. Despite the technical success of some of the solutions developed, it is important to highlight that not all of the artist’s ideas were technically feasible or within the scope of the project. Communicating this effectively and managing the artist’s expectations was key to ensuring that both the robot was functional and ready for the study, and the professional relationship with MOIW was maintained, without either party being let down or led to believe the system was any greater or less than what was agreed on.

During the study, I was not only the lead researcher on site but also a range of other roles that sometimes required me to step out of my comfort zone. These included in no particular order of social or imaginative intensity; Thingamabobas Wrangler, Storyteller, Imagination Guide, The Researcher from Nottingham University, Technical Support.

As part 1 of the study at the National Festival of Making was a two-day event over the weekend during the height of the UK summer holiday, I was left with little choice but to quickly adapt to these new roles or suffer being swarmed by the thousands of curious and enthusiastic visitors that attended the event. To my surprise, and with a little help from Roma and Rachel, I was able to help children and adults alike be transported into the whimsical world of the Thingamabobas, for about 20 minutes at a time.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the experience and opportunity to work with MOIW to not only develop an art installation, but to also help run it was a great privilege. The skills I have learned and applied in both professional engagements as well as in the wild will be beneficial to my PhD research and to myself as an individual.

 

Reflections on my placement at the Department for Transport

post by Phuong Anh (Violet) Nguyen (2022 cohort)

I began my placement in the Data Science team of the Analytic Directorate at the Department of Transport in April 2023 to gain access to datasets for my pilot research. However, I feel that my internship officially began in July, when I was able to become familiar with my work and knew precisely what was expected of me. I still remember the rainy afternoon when I went to the warehouse to collect my IT kit. It was quite a funny memory, and now it is quite emotional to pack and return my kit as my internship is over.

My project

My internship was an integral component of my doctoral research on “Using personas in transport policymaking.” I aimed to combine various data sources to investigate the travel behaviour of various demographic groups, and then use this understanding to inform transport planning and policy formulation.

I began by examining multiple DfT data sources, including the National Transport Survey, Telecoms Data, and Transport Data dashboard. I arranged meetings with several data team members to ask them about how they analysed these data in previous projects. I also had opportunities to discuss with members of other teams including System Thinking, Policy, Social Research, and Data administration… to learn about their work and the policy-making process at DfT.

Since the official release of the transport user personas report in July, I have collaborated closely with the personas team. I began with an examination of the methodology for developing personas. I also attempted to apply additional data science techniques to the same dataset (National Transport Survey) to cluster travellers into distinct groups and compare the results of the various methods.

DfT published transport user personas. (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-user-personas-understanding-different-users-and-their-needs).

I worked with the Social Research team to organise workshops introducing the potential of using personas in DfT’s work, such as Road Investment, AI Strategy, and Highway… In addition, as part of my research, I utilised the Social-technical framework theory to structure the transport system and then gathered data to present and analyse the interaction between personas and other transport system components. On the other hand, I learned how policy is formulated and I will continue to work with the Policy team to investigate how personas can support their work.

Some lessons for myself

About work

Working on the Data Science team, which is part of the Advanced Analytics Directorate, was an excellent opportunity for me to improve my statistics, mathematics, and programming skills. Colleagues were very knowledgeable and supportive. Through the team’s regular meetings and project summaries, I got a general understanding of which projects are active and which models and methodologies are used to solve the problems. Sometimes I found myself bewildered by mathematical formulas and technical models. Although I have studied Data Science in the past, which has provided me with a foundation in Data analysis and Programming, in real work data looked more complicated. The assignments in the placement have taught me how to overcome the challenges of dealing with multiple data types.

Working in Civil Service, I had access to numerous training resources, workshops, and presentations, including but not limited to Science and Programming, this course covered user-centric services, artificial intelligence, evidence-based policymaking, and management skills. This is why I regard my civil servant account to be so valuable.

I received numerous perspectives and comments on my research proposal thanks to weekly discussions with my line manager and multiple team members. Importantly, I learned how to present and explain my ideas and academic theories to people from diverse backgrounds, as well as how to make the ideas clear and simple to comprehend. I believe this is a crucial skill in multidisciplinary research, communication, and public engagement.

About working environment

This was also my first time working in civil service, a “very British” working environment. Even though I have more than five years of experience in the airline industry, it took me a while to become accustomed to office work. It could be because the working environment in Vietnam differs from that in the United Kingdom, business differs from civil service, and full-time office work differs from hybrid work.

In addition to the knowledge and expertise I gained, I learned a great deal about time management and how to use Outlook professionally to organise my work, as well as how to spend concentration time between multiple meetings every day. This was extremely helpful when having to divide my time between multiple tasks, such as PhD research, placement, and meetings with supervisors from various institutions. In addition, I believe that working in person in the office is more beneficial than remote working, having access to a larger screen. being able to meet and discuss with multiple people, rather than being limited to 30-minute meetings and a small laptop screen. Thus, I travelled to London every week. These regular catchups with my line manager/industry partner proved helpful because the industry partner was able to provide a realistic perspective and I was able to update them on my work and interact with other DfT employees who supported my research.

About my personal development

Since I began my PhD journey, I have experienced many “first-time experiences”, including my first time working in Civil Service. This placement is not only an integral part of my PhD research, but also provides me with a great deal of experience and lessons for my personal growth. It was so unusual and sometimes difficult, but it forced me to leave my comfort zone. I was confident in my ability to perform well, having had the previous experience of being an airline strategist in the past, but the new experience of being an intern, learning something new, made me humble and enthusiastic as if I had just started school.

My principal lesson is to simply DO IT, JUST DO IT. I believe that the majority of my depression stems from my tendency to overthink. There were times when I examined the data set and had no idea what to do. I was even afraid to send emails or speak with others. However, when I actually did what I should do – WRITE something and ASK some questions – and I saw results, I realised that that work is simpler than I originally thought. Then I learned that sitting in a state of distress and worrying about the future is ineffective in resolving the issue. I must take action and be diligent to see myself become a little bit better and better every day.

The summer was very short, and most colleagues took vacation time. Honestly, the internship was not “comfortable” in the beginning, but now I believe everything is going well. This placement is also assisting me in developing a clearer plan for my PhD project. I am grateful for the support and lessons I have gained from this opportunity, and I am considering another summer placement next year.

Podcast: Christine Li reflects on Placement

Christine Li, a fourth-year Horizon CDT Phd candidate, is focusing on the design and study of VR prototypes for at-home bodily training, such as performance arts or sports.

Christine’s industry placement took place at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm at the Media Technology and Interaction Design (MID) department. Christine reflects on her time at KTH, the lessons she gained there and how it has influenced her research.

Listen to Christine’s podcast:

 

Three Actually Isn’t a Crowd: Reflections on my Internship with the UKRI TAS Hub

post by Cecily Pepper (2019 cohort)

About the Internship

In December 2021, I began an internship with the UKRI TAS (Trustworthy Autonomous Systems) Hub on two projects: TAS for Health and TAS Test and Trace. I applied to this internship as I have an interest in technology and autonomous systems, how people develop and measure trust towards technology, and, perhaps most of all, the effect of technology on health and wellbeing. My own PhD project is about exploring the impact of social media platforms on the mental health and wellbeing of care-experienced young people, so hopefully the connection and interest between technology, health, and wellbeing is clear. Another key motivator in applying for the TAS internship was that the role involved completing an in-depth thematic analysis for each project. As I am doing multiple thematic analyses for my own research, I thought this would be a great opportunity to enhance and develop my skills in this area. Moreover, the internship was a role that included working with two other interns to complete the analyses. This especially interested me as I enjoy working with others and was curious as to how the group analyses would work compared to the analyses I have done by myself.

The TAS for Health project explored the attitudes towards using a smart mirror for health from two participant groups: those who were recovering from a stroke and those who have the medical condition multiple sclerosis (MS). My role involved taking part in the participant workshops, preparing the transcripts from the workshops, and completing the thematic analysis with the other interns. It was a truly enjoyable experience listening to the experiences of the individuals who participated in the research. As well as this, assisting in the workshops offered another layer of insight to the analysis. The other project, TAS Test and Trace, followed on from previous studies around the general public’s attitudes and trust in the NHS Test and Trace application for Covid-19. For this project, my role was to again prepare the transcripts and complete a thematic analysis with the other interns. I will also contribute to the paper writing for both projects, which are currently underway. This is another aspect of the internship that applies to my own PhD activities, as it is a great opportunity to develop my paper writing skills ready for when I aim to publish my own studies.

Reflections on the Internship Experience

I have thoroughly enjoyed the internship and learned so much. I have developed my thematic analysis skills, my collaborative skills, and learned more about how to present and display research findings (to name a few). For this blog, I will now share some reflections on the experiences I have had now the two projects have ended. Perhaps the biggest and most salient reflection I have from working with two TAS research groups was the value of working with others and being part of a research team. I currently don’t belong in a research group and, as PhD students may know, the doctorate journey can be a lonely one. I find many times in my own work that I wish I could bounce my ideas off someone, especially during analysis work. Don’t get me wrong, I have wonderful supervisors who I meet with regularly and they offer brilliant and insightful advice; but doing an analysis collaboratively with two other people was a fantastic experience. We were able to continuously bounce our ideas off one another, question our reasoning together, and have regular chats about anything we queried. This made me appreciate teamwork in a completely new light and it’s safe to say three was definitely not a crowd! We also all learnt a new way of completing a thematic analysis, explained by a member of the research group, which was a valued addition to our current skillset.

In addition to this, having weekly meetings with a research group was a great experience and made me really feel like I was part of a team. As I mentioned, I don’t belong to any research groups so I haven’t had this experience yet; apart from perhaps my CDT cohort, who I love spending time with, but our research is all so different so it can be hard to find commonalities to discuss, and get-togethers are rare now we’re in the later stages of our PhD and due to the pandemic. On a personal note, I’m a shy introvert and tend to anxiously avoid social events, but being required to work with others so regularly and closely was valuable in pushing me outside of my comfort zone. So, one of the biggest take-aways from my internship is the value of working closely with others and having a team of researchers to meet with regularly. I’ve met some lovely people who I hope to work with again in the future and I have learned so many things about the importance of working with a research team.

The second reflection I had from my internship experience was the realisation and surprise at how welcome a distraction from my own PhD work was. I was in a bit of a rut with my PhD work, struggling with recruiting a hard-to-reach participant group whilst also struggling with the final stages of a separate thematic analysis for another of my studies. With the internship, I soon realised that I welcomed the work with open arms and found my research spark again, that had obviously been dimmed by my own research struggles. While I knew subconsciously that I was struggling with my own work, the internship reignited my love for research and made me realise I needed to remove my head from the imaginary sand and address the issues I had in my own work. This was therefore helpful to me personally as it was a reminder that I had a passion for research, and it was encouragement to resolve the issues I had with my own work rather than burying and avoiding them.

Overall, I had a great time and learnt a lot from both the academic side but also from the personal side. Working on two thematic analyses was fantastic practice and I believe my skills have developed significantly. Additionally, being part of a research team with regular meetings and deadlines was useful for the future, both in an industry and academic sense. Despite the value of both the professional and research skills I have developed, the most enjoyable part of the internship was working closely with other researchers and having a welcomed break from the lonely world of doing a PhD during a global pandemic.

 

The joy of building things. My reflection on the internship at BlueSkeye AI

post by Keerthy Kusumam ( 2017 cohort)

September 2020 – January 2021

I interned at BlueSkeye AI, a company that delivers ethical AI for supporting mental health for the vulnerable population using facial and voice behaviour
analysis. The long term vision of BlueSkeye AI is to ’Create AI you can trust for
a better future, together.’ The goals of my PhD aligns perfectly well with that
of BlueSkeye, where comprehending various facial behaviours to recognise markers of mood disorders forms a core part of the work. The company BlueSkeye AI is cofounded by my PhD supervisor Prof Michel Valstar and the teammates include several of my past PhD colleagues. The following pointers are my reflections on my four-month-long internship at BlueSkeye AI.

The joy of building things that work. The internship at BlueSkeye
rekindled my enthusiasm to build systems that work in the real world, face real
challenges, and create real impact. When I joined, BlueSkeye AI had a product
that was going to be released to the market and what I had to build would
then be integrated into this product. That made it extremely well-defined as a
problem, where we were not trying to define a problem itself but rather engineer a solution that needs working on real-world data, leveraging the cutting-edge computer vision/machine learning research.

Real World Vs Research World. My emphasis on real-world data stems
from my divided self where I am both a computer vision researcher as well as a
roboticist. Before doing my PhD I spent nearly 4 years in a robotics research lab with an active collaboration culture – where everyone in an open-plan workspace contributes to projects irrespective of their original funding sources. This cultivated the exchange of ideas across disciplines – computer vision, cybernetics, robotics, reasoning, machine learning etc leading to very creative and interesting bodies of work. In robotics, computer vision is often a tool that it relies upon to make decisions, which means robustness and consistency precedes accuracy. In computer vision research, however, beating the state-of-the-art on benchmark datasets seems to be the key marker of success. I enjoy both these aspects and the internship opportunity at BlueSkeye AI gave me just that – a place to bring those together. I got to build a computer vision-based social gaze estimation system that works on a smartphone. The challenge was about finding the right balance between exploration and exploitation. Here I had to optimize for efficiency, usability, practicality, simplicity and data efficiency along with the standard performance metrics that I use in research.

The Team and Teamwork. My onboarding was seamless, owing to the
hands-on approach adopted by the BlueSkeye AI’s leadership. I was also familiar with the team, so I was lucky to enjoy an incredibly friendly and supportive environment. The weekly meetings where everyone discussed progress or the issues they faced, posed as learning sessions for me. I understood the value of communication and brainstorming from the team as a whole, to keep up the momentum. I worked in sync with the lead machine learning engineer who set up several documents and code specifically for me, that removed my roadblocks to integrate the module into a mobile device. I also learned how managing tasks in a time-critical manner helps save time and resources for the company as well as yourself.

Importance of values. One should never compromise on their values
while working for a company and it is important to work in a place where value
systems align. BlueSkeye AI’s five-year mission is: ’To create the most-used
technology for ethical machine understanding of face and voice behaviour that enables citizens to be seen, heard, and understood.’ I was astonished by their sensitivity towards mental health research, strict adherence to ethical guidelines while handling data, being transparent to the data volunteers about their data and having numerous clinicians with great expertise on board. Being part of the company albeit during a short internship provided me with a sense of purpose and I felt attuned to my values.

One Giant Leap for My Future: Summer Internship Experience with NASA GeneLab

post by Henry Cope (2019 cohort)

Over the summer I had the honour of taking part in the NASA GeneLab summer internship programme. Despite previous plans to complete this in sunny California, the pandemic made it necessary to adapt the internship format, which I must admit was bittersweet. Nevertheless, I was incredibly excited to step into my role as a space biology bioinformatics intern.

Now, I appreciate right off the bat that this might raise a few questions, so I will endeavour to briefly break down the relevant terms as follows:

      • Space biology – This is the study of the adaptation of terrestrial organisms (e.g., you and I) to the extreme environment of space. Two of the main spaceflight stressors are increased radiation exposure and microgravity (0G). The knowledge generated from space biology is important for developing improved countermeasures, such as to reduce microgravity-driven muscle loss experienced by astronauts, which also occurs on Earth due to factors including muscle wasting diseases, or bed rest following surgery. If you are interested in learning about space biology in more detail, I can recommend this open-access review; it’s a very exciting time right now for spaceflight!
      • Omics – These are types of biological “big data” (usually ending in “-omics”, go figure) that tell us about the underlying functioning of different systems within the body. Of course, a classic example is genomics, in which your unique DNA sequence imparts traits such as eye colour. However, there is also transcriptomics, which capture snapshots of how activated/expressed your genes are at given points in time.
      • Bioinformatics – This is essentially analysing biological data, including omics, via software. When a sample of biological material is taken, it can be processed in the lab for different kinds of omics analyses and then computational methods are used to identify meaningful patterns in the data. Lots of programming! 🙂
      • NASA GeneLab – NASA GeneLab is an organisation that consists of two primary components. One is the data side, which is delivered via a carefully curated public biobank of omics collected from spaceflight missions (usually involving model organisms like mice), or from studies on Earth that simulate aspects of spaceflight. The second side of GeneLab is the people side, which is mainly delivered via international analysis working groups (AWGs) that work together to analyse the data within the repository. Spaceflight experiments are costly, so GeneLab’s open-science approach of increasing access to data and collaboration during analysis is important for maximising the scientific potential of these experiments.

With the definitions out of the way, I will briefly describe my primary project for the internship. Essentially, I was presented with several transcriptomics datasets that had been generated from RNA extracted from the skin of mice. These datasets were derived from mice that had been flown on different missions, with lots of other variables such as differences in diet and duration spent on the International Space Station (ISS). Skin is particularly interesting in the context of space biology for several reasons as follows:

      • In spaceflight, dermatological issues such as rashes are very common
      • Skin is the first line of defence against cosmic radiation and an important barrier against pathogens
      • Skin can be monitored using non-invasive methods like swabs, which avoids risks associated with invasive biopsies
      • Skin can act as a “mirror”, telling us about the underlying health of the body in terms of things like immune function and diet
      • Despite the aforementioned importance of skin, skin is incredibly understudied in space!

I had carried out some initial analysis of the datasets prior to the start of the internship, under the guidance of Craig Willis, who was at the time a PhD student at the University of Exeter and is now a researcher at Ohio University! Whilst I had prior experience with programming, bioinformatics was new to me. Craig very kindly showed me the ropes so that I would have the necessary skills to jump straight into the internship project. That said, GeneLab runs programmes for teaching bioinformatics to students at different levels, so having prior bioinformatics skills was not at all a requirement.

Just before I started the internship, I met Afshin Beheshti, who is a bioinformatician and principal investigator at KBR/NASA Ames Research Center, amongst other roles! Afshin was incredibly friendly so we got on right away. Throughout the internship we met weekly via video call, but we also communicated via Slack throughout the week. I strongly believe that a line of communication which is more direct than email is essential for virtual internships. During the internship, GeneLab also organised online networking events, which gave me the opportunity to talk to the other interns about their projects.

Following my internship, I have continued to work on the skin analysis project, and we are now striving towards a publication, which will include astronaut data (a rarity!) alongside the rodent data. I also had the honour of presenting some of our findings online at the public NASA GeneLab AWG workshop in November, and in-person at the Royal Aeronautical Society Aerospace Medicine Group Annual Symposium in London in December. As part of the continued work on the project, I have also been able to engage with the GeneLab for High School (GL4HS) programme. Several students who have previously completed a high school level internship with GeneLab are now working on tasks such as literature review and figure generation for the publication. An additional output is that some of the semi-automatic figures that I have developed for this project have been adapted to different datasets for use in publications for the Covid-19 International Research Team (COV-IRT), of which Afshin is president.

Ultimately, I am very happy to have completed an internship with GeneLab. I’ve developed some great relationships along the way, which have continued past the scope of the internship. In particular, I’d like to thank Sam Gebre for organising the internship, Afshin Beheshti for being an excellent supervisor, and Sigrid Reinsch, Jennifer Claudio, Liz Blaber and the students involved in the GL4HS programme. If you wish to know more about my project or have questions about space biology in general, please feel free to reach me at: henry.cope@nottingham.ac.uk

-Henry

 

 

 

My Placement at the BBC

post by Joanne Parkes (2020 cohort)

My Business Partner is BBC Research and Development. Early in 2020, I came across an advert for a funded ICASE PhD Studentship seeking individuals interested in Enhancing the Digital Media User Experiences using 14 Human Values. It was proposed that these values or psychological drivers which underpin our behaviour could be utilised in some way to shape future offerings and assess their impact rather than relying on more traditional performance measures such as clicks and view time. The studentship would be dedicated to investigating ways to delivering this.

Whilst my first degree is in Media Production and I initially worked in Radio, my career ended up being in Business Psychology where I have specialised in employee selection, assessment and engagement. This research area sits nicely at the Venn intersect of my interests so it was not a difficult decision to apply, especially as I was excited at the prospect of having time allocated to working with the BBC again by way of the placement.

Early on in the studentship however, I sat in on a presentation given by a couple of members of an earlier cohort on their placements. It didn’t seem that their skills and abilities were well used and I was left with an impression of it being not much more than a work experience. I’d resigned myself to the fact that I just need to get it over and done with and frankly, I hadn’t expected to get much more out of it than 20 credits and if I were lucky, perhaps some useful connections to leverage when it came to conducting my research.

I’m pleased to say that this has not been the case. It soon became apparent that my experience was going to be very different to what I’d heard about from 2 students whose experiences were perhaps the unfortunate exception to the rule. My industry supervisors engaged with me right from the start, setting up regular meetings which alternated between discussing their work and my studies. They sought my input on various projects which entailed everything from peer review to internal presentation of data analysis and made me feel valued for my contributions.

It probably helped that I started the studentship when my industry supervisors were part way through creating a Human Values inventory questionnaire which could be used to support several objectives such as helping to design values led ideation workshops through to assessing deliverables in terms of facilitating achievements of values aligned aspirations. My working history imbued me with directly relevant and transferable skills, giving me the confidence to review the work in progress and proffer constructive feedback which was granted more than lip-service consideration. This marked an unofficial start to working towards my placement.

Soon after, a section of the inventory was being tailored to measure alignment to some of the values in a workplace setting, specifically around ‘Belonging to a Group’ and ‘Receiving Recognition’. I could draw parallels with my previous work in the field of Employee Engagement, on measuring attitudes towards Equity, Diversity and Inclusion and again, I was encouraged to provide input towards survey items. Where this differed however was the intention behind the tool to engender self-reflection at time of answering, perhaps to prompt discussion with immediate teams and line-managers where values were not being met rather than analysis of responses at an aggregate level as is more typical in Employee Engagement surveys.

Early in the second semester, the placement was formally kicked off and I was able to be more involved in several short studies:

Study 1 (n: 153) sought attitudes from participants on BBC iPlayer’s capacity to fulfil their values using a 5-point Likert scale and used open questions to seek examples of programmes in each of the values areas (although platforms were often suggested as well, e.g. YouTube being posited for ‘Growing Myself’). This provided some insight into the values considered less well served plus an indication of group score differences relating to gender. There were some clear winners among programmes with ‘Blue Planet’ being listed most often by far for facilitating ‘Explore the World’.

Study 2 (n: 1,147) was a very short follow up survey where participants were provided with 20 programmes to rate in terms of their ability to facilitate each of the values. I helped to select the programmes based on a combination of recent ratings and output of Study 1 in an attempt to present a range of popular genres to increase the likelihood of the participant watching them. I was given autonomy over the analysis and presented our findings across the 2 studies to an internal R&D monthly sectional meeting which included the Head of Applied Research.

Study 3 (n: 15) took a big step from my comfort zone in the form of a in-depth interview on attitudes towards personalisation online. This is the first study I have been involved in where we are actively seeking to publish the findings – wish us luck!

Along the way, I have also volunteered to take part in studies conducted in other areas of BBC R&D. One (Orchestra Surround Sound) involved calibrating multiple devices (e.g. computer, phone, tablet) to create a more interactive and engaging experience with an orchestra which enabled participants to experiment with sound placement and volume. Another involved evaluating room acoustic representation in binaural spatial audio (Polymersive Reverb). Another sound specific study (Soft Clipper listening tests) related to software designed to address sound distortion as part of the BBC’s upgrade of FM transmitters. I also participated in a critical evaluation of R1 Relax and attended a workshop discussing benefits and ethical implications of applying AI&ML to thumbnail selection for programme representation. The latter was really helpful for picking up pointers on focus group facilitation (particularly in a remote setting).

As a panel member in a facilitated discussion group run by the BBC R&D Diversity & Inclusion working group which is driving a range of initiatives to identify and address challenges in this space, I shared what I considered to be challenges and benefits of my neuro divergence in the workplace. On another occasion, I participated in Hybrid Meetings User Testing, providing feedback on any issues or potential policies from my disability perspective. As much as this was another opportunity to network, it provided me a platform through which to advocate.

The work I have participated in, both that allocated by my industry supervisors and that which I have volunteered for, has been beneficial in a number of ways. Among other things, it has:

      • given me an idea of the scope of experimentation that the BBC has the resource to conduct,
      • helped me learn and practice research skills I am less comfortable with, particularly around qualitative rather than quantitative approaches,
      • given me some ideas as to how I might conduct some of my own research in the future,
      • provided me with some findings directly relevant to my research question,
      • cemented a strong working relationship with my industry supervisors to the extent that I feel a part of (and meaningful contributor to) the wider team rather than an adjunct.

A challenge with such a large organisation with many initiatives vying for attention seems to be that it can sometimes be hard to get traction for a new idea or initiative. However, many staff are still working remotely so I am not in a position to conclude if it is the nature of the organisation or a product of working in isolation that on occasion, it has seemed that proposing a cross team study has initially been akin to pushing against an opening door only to end up in a room called limbo.

On the other side, a benefit of the scale of my industry partner is reach when it comes to recruiting study participants. I was really impressed with the speed with which we were able to reach target completion rates on several occasions. This said, I have learned not to take this for granted as I have been aware of situations where colleagues have found recruitment much more arduous, so consideration still needs to be given to sampling, targeting and study appeal.

It seems almost impossible to reflect on anything that has occurred in the last couple of years without making reference to COVID19 related impacts. In my case, it has meant that there has been far less face-to-face time, but I don’t believe that this has been too detrimental as, prior to commencing the studentship, I had worked mainly from home for some years. This said, I was finally able to visit the offices towards the end of last year and a tour of the facilities has revealed options for study approaches that whilst potentially beneficial, now seem perhaps indulgent because in my mindset, the location is so novel to me.

When the placement started (and when it will end) has a very blurred timeline, it certainly hasn’t consisted of a discreet 3 month full or 6 month part time block which comes with the potential to over-commit but also comes with the potential to forget a genuine partnership throughout the course of study.

To conclude, I have gained a lot more from the placement than I had initially expected. I’ve had facetime with people well placed to support my research in the future and importantly to me, I’ve felt that I have made meaningful contributions throughout rather than (virtually) turning up in order to tick a box.