# PWR-256 — Human–animal–machine collaboration: learner worksheet Release: Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition Estimated time: Estimated 31 min reading and worksheet pass Difficulty: Advanced Equipment: Specialist equipment — A supplied fictional protocol involving six cats, a mobile robot and a human handler. Each cat has two optional sessions, giving 12 opportunities; 10 end with a visit to an activity zone. The camera calls any orientation toward the robot 'engagement.' Appetite, litter use and room temperature are logged, but there is no veterinary health review, individual withdrawal signal, validated mental-state measure or stationary-enrichment comparator.; Audit grid for purpose, species/individual, welfare domains, agency, human/public rights, sensor/model, autonomy/actuation, fail-safe, override, logs, outcomes and governance.; The robot specification lists a force limit and handler emergency stop. In the sole simulated network-loss test it continues moving for 12 seconds. Video is retained for 30 days with no bystander rule. Supply a simpler stationary-enrichment comparison sheet and a non-deployment verdict card. Space: Desk / seated Automated structural checklist: 10 of 10 structural checks present Evidence quality/context: G5; Focused research depth Automated method-quality band: Comprehensive Method-rating basis: Structure coverage, instruction/check specificity, alternative distinctness, source troubleshooting, comparison depth and whether purpose/check fields are authored rather than derived. Editorial review: Pending manual editorial sign off ## Before you begin - [ ] I read the tutorial authority and stop conditions. - [ ] I have the required equipment/space or a declared accessible alternative. ## Canonical source context This research tutorial teaches how to evaluate a proposed human–animal–machine system without involving a live animal. You will define the human purpose, species and individual context, assess welfare domains and opportunities to withdraw, map human consent and proxy limits, inspect sensing, autonomy, actuation and model drift, verify override, fail-safe and logs, compare with a simpler alternative, and separate research evidence from deployment authority. Target outcome: The learner produces a non-deployment evidence audit that identifies welfare, agency, human/public consent, machine reliability, fail-safe, adverse-event and governance gaps in one published or fictional system. ### Authority and setup conditions - Use documents only; no live feed, animal, location or device is connected. - Write the research question, proposed benefit and prohibited deployment before reading performance results. - Set the rule that missing welfare, withdrawal, fail-safe or accountable authority forces non-deployment. ### Required or supplied materials - A supplied fictional protocol involving six cats, a mobile robot and a human handler. Each cat has two optional sessions, giving 12 opportunities; 10 end with a visit to an activity zone. The camera calls any orientation toward the robot 'engagement.' Appetite, litter use and room temperature are logged, but there is no veterinary health review, individual withdrawal signal, validated mental-state measure or stationary-enrichment comparator. - Audit grid for purpose, species/individual, welfare domains, agency, human/public rights, sensor/model, autonomy/actuation, fail-safe, override, logs, outcomes and governance. - The robot specification lists a force limit and handler emergency stop. In the sole simulated network-loss test it continues moving for 12 seconds. Video is retained for 30 days with no bystander rule. Supply a simpler stationary-enrichment comparison sheet and a non-deployment verdict card. ## 1. Define the human purpose State whose problem the system solves, for whom and why an animal and machine are proposed. Why: Novelty can obscure a weak or human-centred purpose. Success check: The purpose and beneficiary are explicit. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “State whose problem the system solves, for whom and why an animal and machine are proposed.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The purpose and beneficiary are explicit.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 2. Describe species and individual context Record species-specific needs, age/health where ethically reported, prior experience, environment, handler relationship and what cannot generalise. Why: Six cats can differ in preference, health, habituation and stress response. Success check: The audit names individual and species limits. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Record species-specific needs, age/health where ethically reported, prior experience, environment, handler relationship and what cannot generalise.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The audit names individual and species limits.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 3. Apply a welfare-domain screen Examine nutrition, physical environment, health, behavioural interactions and mental-state indicators with qualified sources. Why: Mission success can coexist with poor welfare. Success check: Every domain has evidence, uncertainty or a veto gap. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Examine nutrition, physical environment, health, behavioural interactions and mental-state indicators with qualified sources.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Every domain has evidence, uncertainty or a veto gap.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 4. Inspect agency and withdrawal Look for choice to approach, avoid, rest and leave, how refusal is detected and whether the task proceeds without the animal. Why: Behaviour is not human-style consent, but loss of choice is ethically material. Success check: Withdrawal is operationally possible and not punished. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Look for choice to approach, avoid, rest and leave, how refusal is detected and whether the task proceeds without the animal.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Withdrawal is operationally possible and not punished.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 5. Map human and public rights Identify handler/participant consent, bystanders, privacy, public-space sensing and who can complain or stop. Why: Multispecies systems can affect people who never volunteered. Success check: Every human data and exposure route has authority or is prohibited. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Identify handler/participant consent, bystanders, privacy, public-space sensing and who can complain or stop.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Every human data and exposure route has authority or is prohibited.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 6. Map machine sensing and inference List sensors, training data, model/version, inferred states, uncertainty, errors, drift and whether welfare claims exceed the signals. Why: A classifier cannot replace species-specific welfare judgement. Success check: The audit separates observation from machine inference. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “List sensors, training data, model/version, inferred states, uncertainty, errors, drift and whether welfare claims exceed the signals.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The audit separates observation from machine inference.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 7. Map autonomy and actuation Record what the machine can do, action limits, latency, physical forces, human supervision and responsibility. Why: Sensing risk differs from acting near an animal. Success check: Every actuation has a responsible human and safe bound. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Record what the machine can do, action limits, latency, physical forces, human supervision and responsibility.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Every actuation has a responsible human and safe bound.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 8. Verify fail-safe, override and logs Find the default safe state, emergency stop, independent stop authority, event logs, cybersecurity and recovery after failure. Why: A system needs more than normal-operation performance. Success check: Failure can leave animal and people safe without model cooperation. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Find the default safe state, emergency stop, independent stop authority, event logs, cybersecurity and recovery after failure.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Failure can leave animal and people safe without model cooperation.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 9. Compare a simpler alternative Ask whether a non-animal, non-autonomous or lower-sensing method meets the purpose with less burden. Why: A technical demonstration must justify welfare and complexity costs. Success check: The proposed system has a measured net advantage or loses the comparison. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Ask whether a non-animal, non-autonomous or lower-sensing method meets the purpose with less burden.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The proposed system has a measured net advantage or loses the comparison.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 10. Grade evidence and deployment gap Separate concept, feasibility, controlled study, welfare evidence, durable outcome and authorised deployment; list adverse-event criteria and next gate. Why: Research success is not deployment permission. Success check: The verdict is deployable only if authority exists; otherwise redesign or non-deployment. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Separate concept, feasibility, controlled study, welfare evidence, durable outcome and authorised deployment; list adverse-event criteria and next gate.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The verdict is deployable only if authority exists; otherwise redesign or non-deployment.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## Reflection What changed? ________________________________________________________________________________ What remains difficult? ________________________________________________________________________________ What will I repeat, adapt, ask for help with, or stop? ________________________________________________________________________________ --- Completion of this worksheet demonstrates tutorial participation only. It does not establish capability, qualification, safety clearance, diagnosis, treatment or independent validation.