Advertisement

Towards Inclusive Education in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Perspectives, Challenges, and Opportunities

  • Phaedra S. MohammedEmail author
  • Eleanor ‘Nell’ Watson
Chapter
Part of the Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education book series (PRRE)

Abstract

In the West and other parts of the world, the ideal of an individualised, personalised education system has become ever more influential in recent times. Over the last 30 years, research has shown how effective, individually tailored approaches can be achieved using artificial intelligence techniques and intelligent learning environments (ILE). As new audiences of learners are exposed daily to ILEs through mobile devices and ubiquitous Internet access, significantly different challenges to the original goal of personalised instruction are presented. In particular, learners have cultural backgrounds and preferences that may not align with most mainstream educational systems. When faced with practical cultural issues, the transfer of successful research and ILEs to underserved contexts has been naturally quite low. This chapter first takes a step back and analyses perspectives on how intelligent learning environments have transitioned from focusing on instructional rigour to focusing more deeply on the learner. Next, it examines some major challenges faced when ILEs aim to integrate culturally sensitive design features. The chapter then discusses several opportunities for dealing with these challenges from novel perspectives such as teacher modelling, the use of educational robots and empathic systems and highlights important concerns such as machine ethics.

Keywords

Intelligent learning environments Intelligent tutoring systems Culturally aware technology-enhanced learning Enculturated conversational agents Contextualisation 

References

  1. Alavi, H. S., & Dillenbourg, P. (2012). An ambient awareness tool for supporting supervised collaborative problem solving. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 5(3), 264–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, R. E. (1991). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  3. Allessio, D., Woolf, B., Wixon, N., et al. (2018). Ella me ayudó (she helped me): Supporting Hispanic and English language learners in a Math ITS. In C. Penstein Rosé, et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 10948, Artificial intelligence in education. AIED 2018. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. English Oxford Living Dictionaries (2018). Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/artificial_intelligence.
  5. Aylett, R., Paiva, A., Vannini, N., et al. (2009). But that was in another country: Agents and intercultural empathy. In: K. S. Decker, J. S. Sichman, C. Sierra, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems, Budapest, Hungary, 10–15 May 2009 (pp. 329–336). Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, R. S. (2016). Stupid tutoring systems, intelligent humans. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2), 600–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bennett, M. J. (1986). A development approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Biggs, J. (2018). This happy robot helps kids with autism, Techcrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/13/this-happy-robot-helps-kids-with-autism/. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  9. Blanchard, E. G. (2012). Is it adequate to model the socio-cultural dimension of e-learners by informing a fixed set of personal criteria? In 12th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), USA (pp. 388–392).Google Scholar
  10. Blanchard, E. G. (2015). Socio-cultural imbalances in AIED research: Investigations, implications and opportunities. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 25(2), 204–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blanchard, E. G., & Ogan, A. (2010). Infusing cultural awareness into intelligent tutoring systems for a globalized world. In Advances in intelligent tutoring systems, SCI 308 (pp. 485–505). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Blanchard, E. G., & Mizoguchi, R. (2014). Designing culturally-aware tutoring systems with MAUOC, the more advanced upper ontology of culture. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 9(1), 41–69.Google Scholar
  13. Blanchard, E. G., Karanasios, S., & Dimitrova, V. (2013). A conceptual model of intercultural communication: Challenges, development method and achievements. In E. G. Blanchard & I. Gasparini (Eds.), 4th International Workshop on Culturally-Aware Tutoring Systems (CATS)—AIED 2013 Workshops Proceedings (Vol. 5, pp. 1–10).Google Scholar
  14. Borgadus Cortez, M. (2017). AI in education will grow exponentially by 2021. Edtech, Focus on K-12. https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2017/07/ai-education-will-grow-exponentially-2021. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  15. Bray, B. A., & McClaskey, K. A. (2016). How to personalize learning: A practical guide for getting started and going deeper. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brusilovsky, P. (1994). Student model centered architecture for intelligent learning environments. In Proceeding of 4th International Conference on User Modeling, Hyannis, MA, USA, August 15–19, 1994 (pp. 31–36). http://www.pitt.edu/~peterb/papers/UM94.html.
  18. Cambridge advanced learner’s dictionary. (2003). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Cassell, J. (2009). Social practice: Becoming enculturated in human-computer interaction. In C. Stephanidis (Ed.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 5616, Proceeding of 5th International Conference on Universal Access in HCI, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19–24, 2009 (pp. 303–313). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Castellano, G., Paiva, A., Kappas, A., et al. (2013). Towards empathic virtual and robotic tutors. In H. C. Lane, K. Yacef, J. Mostow, et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 7926, Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2013. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~ruth/Papers/planning/AIED13-EMOTE-sub.pdf.
  21. Chandramouli, K., Stewart, C., Brailsford, T., et al. (2008). CAE-L: An ontology modelling cultural behaviour in adaptive education. In P. Mylonas, M. Wallace, & M. Angelides (Eds.), 3rd International Workshop on Semantic Media Adaptation and Personalization (pp. 183–188). Washington, USA: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  22. De-Arteaga, M., Herlands, W., Neill, D. B., et al. (2018). Machine learning for the developing world. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 9(2), Article 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. De Jong, M., & Warmelink, H. (2017). OASISTAN: An intercultural role-playing simulation game to recognize cultural dimensions. Simulation & Gaming, 48(2), 178–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dial, M. (2018). Heartificial empathy: Putting heart into business and artificial intelligence.Google Scholar
  25. Dillenbourg, P. (2016). The evolution of research on digital education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 544–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Donnelly, P. J., Blanchard, N., Samei, B., et al. (2016). Automatic teacher modeling from live classroom audio. In Proceedings of 24th ACM International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (UMAP) (pp. 45–53). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  27. Druga, S. (2018). The story of Cognimates. In Proceedings of 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC), Trondheim, Norway, June 19–22, 2018. New York, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
  28. Druga, S., Williams, R., Breazeal, C., et al. (2017). Hey Google is it OK if I eat you? Initial explorations in child-agent interaction. In 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children, Stanford, California, USA, June 27–30, 2017 (pp. 595–600). ACM. http://robotic.media.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2017/06/idcwp0180-drugaACR.pdf.
  29. DuBoulay, B., Avramides, K. A., Luckin, R., et al. (2010). Towards systems that care: A conceptual framework based on motivation, metacognition and affect. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 20(3), 197–229.Google Scholar
  30. Empathy. (2018). https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/empathy. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  31. Endrass, B., André, E., & Rehm, M. (2011). Towards culturally-aware virtual agent systems. In E. G. Blanchard & D. Allard (Eds.), The handbook of research on culturally-aware information technology: Perspectives and models (pp. 412–428). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ferster, B. (2014). Learning from the intersection of education and technology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Finkelstein, S., Yarzebinski, E., Vaughn, C., Ogan, A., & Cassell, J. (2013). The effects of culturally congruent educational technologies on student achievement. In H. C. Lane, K. Yacef, J. Mostow, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of 16th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, AIED, Memphis (pp. 493–502). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Finland schools are testing out robot teachers. (2018). https://nypost.com/2018/03/27/finland-schools-are-testing-out-robot-teachers/. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  35. Gasparini, I., Pimenta, M. S., & Moreira de Oliveira, J. P. (2011). How to apply context awareness in an adaptive e-learning environment to improve personalization capabilities? In G. Acuña, J. A. Baier (Eds.), Proceedings of 30th International Conference of the Chilean Computer Society, SCCC, Curico, Chile, November 9–11, 2011 (pp. 161–170). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  36. Grand Challenges—Advanced Personalised Learning. (2018). http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/challenges/learning.aspx. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  37. Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  38. Hayashi, Y. (2018). Gaze feedback and pedagogical suggestions in collaborative learning investigation of explanation performance on self’s concept in a knowledge integration task. In C. Rosé, R. Martínez-Maldonado, H. U. Hoppe, et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence: Vol. 10947, Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) (pp. 78–87). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Heffernan, N., & Heffernan, C. (2014). The ASSISTments ecosystem: Building a platform that brings scientists and teachers together for minimally invasive research on human learning and teaching. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(4), 470–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83.Google Scholar
  41. Hitzler, P., Krötzsch, M., & Rudolph, S. (2010). Foundations of semantic web technologies. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
  42. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviours, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  43. Holstein, K., McLaren, B., & Aleven, V. (2018). Student learning benefits of a mixed-reality teacher awareness tool in AI-enhanced classrooms. In C. Rosé, R. Martínez-Maldonado, H. U. Hoppe, et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence: Vol. 10947, Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) (pp. 154–168). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  44. ICT Facts and Figures. (2017). https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFactsFigures2017.pdf. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  45. Johnson, S. (1979). A dictionary of the english language (Vol. 1). London: Times Books.Google Scholar
  46. Johnson, W. L., & Lester, J. C. (2016). Face-to-Face interaction with pedagogical agents, twenty years later. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Johnson, W. L., Beal, C., Fowles-Winkler, A., et al. (2004). Tactical language training system: An interim report. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 3220, 7th International conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Maceió, Alagoas, Brazil, August 30–September 3, 2004 (pp. 336–345). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kahn, P. H. Jr., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., et al. (2012). Robovie, you’ll have to go into the closet now: Children’s social and moral relationships with a humanoid robot. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 303. https://depts.washington.edu/hints/publications/Robovie_Closet_Study_Developmental_Psych_2012.pdf. Accessed October 22, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kay, J., & McCalla, G. (2003). The careful double vision of self. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13, 11–18.Google Scholar
  50. Lugrin, B., Frommel, J., & Andre, E. (2018). Combining a data-driven and theory-based approach to generate culture-dependent behaviours for virtual characters. In C. Faucher (Ed.), Intelligent Systems Reference Library: Vol. 134, Advances in culturally-aware intelligent systems and in cross-cultural psychological studies (pp. 111–142). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  51. Mascarenas, S., Degens, N., Paiva, A., et al. (2016). Modeling culture in intelligent virtual agents from theory to implementation. Autonomous Agent Multi-Agent Systems, 30, 931–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mavrikis, M., Holme, W., Zhang, J., et al. (2018). Fractions lab goes east: Learning and interaction with an exploratory learning environment in China. In C. Rosé, R. Martínez-Maldonado, H. U. Hoppe, et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence: Vol. 10947, Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) (pp. 209–214). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  53. McLoughlin, C., & Oliver, R. (2000). Designing learning environments for cultural inclusivity: A case study of indigenous online learning at tertiary level. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 58–72.Google Scholar
  54. Melis, E., Goguadze, G., Libbrecht, P., et al. (2011). Culturally-aware mathematics education technology. In E. G. Blanchard & D. Allard (Eds.), The handbook of research on culturally-aware information technology: Perspectives and models (pp. 543–557). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Merriam-Webster Inc. (1983). Webster’s ninth new collegiate dictionary. MA: Springfield.Google Scholar
  56. Mizoguchi, R., & Bourdeaux, J. (2016). Using ontological engineering to overcome AI-ED problems: Contribution, impact and perspectives. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mohammed, P. S. (2017). Dynamic cultural contextualisation of intelligent learning environments (Ph.D. thesis). The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine.Google Scholar
  58. Mohammed, P. S. (2018). Ontological support for the cultural contextualisation of intelligent learning environments for inclusive education. Paper presented at the international workshop on context and culture in intelligent tutoring systems at intelligent tutoring systems, Montreal, Canada, June 12, 2018.Google Scholar
  59. Mohammed, P., & Mohan, P. (2013). Contextualised student modelling for enculturated systems. In E. G. Blanchard, I. Gasparini (Eds.), 4th International Workshop on Culturally-Aware Tutoring Systems (CATS)—AIED 2013 Workshops Proceedings (Vol. 5, pp. 20–29).Google Scholar
  60. Mohammed, P., & Mohan, P. (2015). Dynamic cultural contextualisation of educational content in intelligent learning environments using ICON. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 25(2), 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nouri, E., Georgila, K., & Traum, D. (2017). Culture-specific models of negotiation for virtual characters: Multi-attribute decision-making based on culture-specific values. Culture AI & Society, 32(1), 51–63.Google Scholar
  62. Nye, B. D. (2015). Intelligent tutoring systems by and for the developing world: A review of trends and approaches for educational technology in a global context. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 25(2), 177–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Ogan, A., Walker, E., Baker, R., et al. (2015a). Towards understanding how to assess help-seeking behaviour across cultures. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 25, 229–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ogan, A., Yarzebinski, E., Fernández, P., et al. (2015b). Cognitive tutor use in Chile: Understanding classroom and lab culture. In C. Conati, et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence: Vol. 9112, Proceedings of 17th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) (pp. 318–327). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  65. Pham, P., & Wang, J. (2018). Predicting learners’ emotions in mobile MOOC learning via a multimodal intelligent tutor. In C. Rosé, R. Martínez-Maldonado, H. U. Hoppe, et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence: Vol. 10947, Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) (pp. 150–159). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  66. Pinkwart, N. (2016). Another 25 years of AIED? Challenges and opportunities for intelligent educational technologies of the future. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 771–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rehm, M. (2010). Developing enculturated agents: Pitfalls and strategies. In E. G. Blanchard & D. Allard (Eds.), The handbook of research on culturally-aware information technology: Perspectives and models (pp. 362–386). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  68. Rehm, M. (2018). Affective body movements (for robots) across cultures. In C. Faucher (Ed.), Intelligent Systems Reference Library: Vol. 134, Advances in culturally-aware intelligent systems and in cross-cultural psychological studies (pp 165–188). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  69. Rehm, M., Andre, E., Nakano, Y., et al. (2007). The CUBE-G approach—Coaching culture-specific nonverbal behavior by virtual agents. In: I. Mayer & H. Mastik (Eds.), ISAGA 2007: Organizing and learning through gaming and simulation.Google Scholar
  70. Rhoads, R. A. (2015). MOOCS, high technology and higher learning. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Rise of the robots: Mady Delvaux on why their use should be regulated, EU Parliament. (2017). http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/economy/20170109STO57505/rise-of-the-robots-mady-delvaux-on-why-their-use-should-be-regulated. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  72. Robbins, C. (2006). Providing cultural context with educational multimedia in the South Pacific. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 202–212.Google Scholar
  73. Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 582–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rosé, C. P., & Ferschke, O. (2016). Technology support for discussion based learning: From computer supported collaborative learning to the future of massive open online courses. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 660–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rudovic, O., Utsumi, Y., Lee, J., et al. (2018). CultureNet: A deep learning approach for engagement intensity estimation from face images of children with autism. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Madrid, Spain, October 1–5, 2018. IEEE Xplore.Google Scholar
  76. Savard, I., & Mizoguchi, R. (2016). Ontology of culture: A procedural approach for cultural adaptation in ITSs. In W. Chen, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of 24th International Conference on Computers in Education. India: Asia Pacific Society for Computers in Education.Google Scholar
  77. Shah, D. (2018). By the numbers: MOOCS in 2017. https://www.class-central.com/report/mooc-stats-2017/. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  78. Sharifian, F. (2003). On cultural conceptualisations. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 3(3), 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Six key benefits of adaptive learning. (2013). http://www.dreambox.com/blog/six-benefits-of-adaptive-learning. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  80. Thakker, D., Karanasios, S., Blanchard, E., et al. (2017). Ontology for cultural variations in interpersonal communication: Building on theoretical models and crowdsourced knowledge. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(6), 1411–1428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. The IEEE global initiative on ethics of autonomous and intelligent systems. Affective computing. (2018). https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-standards/standards/web/documents/other/ead_affective_computing_v2.pdf. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  82. The US National Academy of Engineering. (2018). https://www.scientia.global/the-usnational-academy-of-engineering/. Accessed October 22, 2018.
  83. Tims, M. J. (2016). Letting artificial intelligence in education out of the box: Educational cobots and smart classrooms. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 701–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1997). Riding the waves of culture. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.Google Scholar
  85. Uchidiuno, J., Yarzebinski, E., Madaio, M., et al. (2018). Designing appropriate learning technologies for school versus home settings in Tanzanian rural villages. In Proceedings of 1st ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies, Menlo Park and San Jose, CA, USA, June 20–22, 2018. New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  86. VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Vartak, M. P., Almeida, S. F., & Heffernan, N. T. (2008). Extending ITS authoring tools to be culturally-aware. In E. G. Blanchard & D. Allard (Eds.), Proceedings of 1st International Workshop on Culturally-Aware Tutoring Systems (CATS 2008)—ITS 2008 Workshops Proceeding, Montreal, Canada, June 23–27, 2008 (pp. 101–105).Google Scholar
  88. Wang, S. (2018). AI robots are transforming parenting in China, CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/28/health/china-ai-early-education/index.html. Accessed 22 Oct 2018.
  89. Wang, N., Shapiro, A., Feng, A., et al. (2018). Learning by explaining to a digital doppelganger. In R. Nkambou, R. Azevedo, & J. Vassileva (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 10858, Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 256–264). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  90. Williams, R., Vazquez, C., Druga, S., et al. (2018). My doll says it’s OK: Voice-enabled toy influences children’s moral decisions. In Proceedings of 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children, Trondheim, Norway, June 19–22, 2018 (pp. 625–631). New York: USA, ACM.Google Scholar
  91. Woolf, B. P. (2009). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  92. Yadollahi, E., Johal, W., Paiva, A., et al. (2018). When deictic gestures in a robot can harm child-robot collaboration. In Proceedings of 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children, Trondheim, Norway, June 19–22, 2018 (pp. 195–206). New York: USA, ACM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Phaedra S. Mohammed
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eleanor ‘Nell’ Watson
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computing and Information TechnologyThe University of the West IndiesSt. AugustineTrinidad and Tobago
  2. 2.AI & Robotics FacultySingularity UniversityMountain ViewUSA
  3. 3.Dean of Cognitive ScienceExosphere AcademyPalhoçaBrazil

Personalised recommendations