With the prevalence of data-hungry deep learning approaches in Artificial Intelligent (AI) as the de facto standard, now more than ever there is a need for labelled data. However, while there have been interesting recent discussions on the definition of readiness levels of data, the same type of scrutiny on annotations is still missing in general: we do not know how or when the annotations were collected or what their inherent biases are. Additionally, there are now forms of annotation beyond standard static sets of labels that call for a formalisation and redefinition of the annotation concept (e.g., rewards in reinforcement learning or directed links in causality). During this Fellowship we will design and establish the protocols for transparent annotations that empowers the data curator to report on the process, the practitioner to automatically evaluate the value of annotations and the users to provide the most informative and actionable feedback. This Fellowship will address all these through a holistic human-centric research agenda, bridging gaps in fundamental research and public engagement with AI. The Fellowship aims to lay the foundations for a two-way approach to annotations, where the paradigm is shifted from annotations simply being a resource to them becoming a means for AI systems and humans to interact. The bigger picture is that, with annotations seen as an interface between both entities, we will be in a much better position to guide the relation of trust in between learning systems and users, where users translate their preferences into the learning systems' objective functions. This approach will help produce a much needed transformation in how potentially sensitive aspects of AI become a step closer to being reliable and trustworthy.

FARSCOPE-TU (Towards Ubiquity) will train a new generation of "T-shaped roboticists" in the priority area of Robotics and Autonomous Systems (RAS). T-shaping means graduates will combine the depth of individual PhD research experience with broad awareness of the priority area, including technical tools and topics spanning multiple disciplines. Breadth will be enhanced by strong understanding of the industrial and societal context in which future RAS will operate. These graduates will meet the need for future innovators in RAS, evidenced by industrial partner demand and growing research investment, to deliver potential UK global leadership in the RAS area. That need spans many applications and technologies, so FARSCOPE-TU adopts a broad and ambitious vision of RAS ubiquity, motivating the research challenge to make RAS that are significantly more interactive with their environments. The FARSCOPE-TU training experience has been carefully designed to support T-shaping by bringing in students from many disciplines and upskilling them through an integrated programme of individual research and cohort activities, which mix together throughout the four years of study. The FARSCOPE-TU research challenge necessitates multidisciplinary thinking, as the enabling technologies of computer science and engineering interface with questions of psychology, biology, policy, ethics, law and more. Students from this diverse range of backgrounds will be recruited, with reskilling supported through fundamental training and peer learning at the outset. The first year will be organized as a formal programme of study, equivalent to a Masters degree. The remaining three years will focus on PhD research, punctuated by mandatory cohort-based training to refresh first year content and all subject to annual progress monitoring. Topics will include responsible innovation, enterprise, public engagement, and industrial context. FARSCOPE-TU has formed partnerships with 19 organizations who share its vision, have helped co-create the training programme, and span technologies and applications that align with the CDT's broad interpretation of RAS. Partner engagement will be central to covering industrial context training. Partners and the FARSCOPE-TU team have also co-created a flexible programme of engagement mechanisms, designed to support a diverse set of partner sizes and interests, to allow collaborations to evolve, and to be responsive to potential new partners. The programme includes mentoring, mutual training by and for partners, collaboration on research and industry projects, sponsorship and leveraged funding opportunities. Partners have committed £2.5M in leverage to support FARSCOPE-TU including 15 studentships from the hosts and 12 sponsored places from industry. FARSCOPE-TU will promote equality, diversity and inclusion both internally and, since the vision includes robots interacting with society, in its research. For example, FARSCOPE-TU could consider how training data bias would affect equality of interaction between humans and home assistance robots. FARSCOPE-TU will instigate a high-profile Single Equality Scheme named "Inclusive Robotics" that combines operational initiatives, including explicit targets, with events and training, linked to responsible innovation and human interaction. FARSCOPE-TU will deliver a joint PhD award, badged by partners University of Bristol and University of the West of England. The CDT will be run through their established Bristol Robotics Lab partnership, providing over 4,500sqm dedicated RAS laboratory space and a community of over 50 supervisors. BRL's existing FARSCOPE CDT provides the security of a strong track record, with 46 students recruited in four cohorts so far and an approved joint programme. FARSCOPE-TU builds on that experience with a revised first year to support diverse intake and early partner engagement, enhanced contextual training, the new T-shape concept and the wider ubiquity vision.

Our Centre brings together a world leading team of mathematicians, statisticians and clinicians with a range of industrial partners, patients and other stakeholders to focus on the development of new methods for managing and treating chronic health conditions using predictive mathematical models. This unique approach is underpinned by the expertise and breadth of experience of the Centre's team and innovative approaches to both the research and translational aspects. At present, many chronic disorders are diagnosed and managed based upon easily identifiable phenomena in clinically collected data. For example, features of the electrical activity of the heart of brain are used to diagnose arrhythmias and epilepsy. Sampling hormone levels in the blood is used for a range of endocrine conditions, and psychological testing is used in dementia and schizophrenia. However, it is becoming increasingly understood that these clinical observables are not static, but rather a reflection of a highly dynamic and evolving system at a single snapshot in time. The qualitative nature of these criteria, combined with observational data which is incomplete and changes over time, results in the potential for non-optimal decision-making. As our population ages, the number of people living with a chronic disorder is forecast to rise dramatically, increasing an already unsustainable financial burden of healthcare costs on society and potentially a substantial reduction in quality of life for the many affected individuals. Critical to averting this are early and accurate diagnoses, optimal use of available medications, as well as new methods of surgery. Our Centre will facilitate these through developing mathematical and statistical tools necessary to inform clinical decision making on a patient-by-patient basis. The basis of this approach is patient-specific mathematical models, the parameters of which are determined directly from clinical data obtained from the patient. As an example of this, our recent research in the field of epilepsy has revealed that seizures may emerge from the interplay between the activity in specific regions of the brain, and the network structures formed between those regions. This hypothesis has been tested in a cohort of people with epilepsy and we identified differences in their brain networks, compared to healthy volunteers. Mathematical analysis of these networks demonstrated that they had a significantly increased propensity to generate seizures, in silico, which we proposed as a novel biomarker of epilepsy. To validate this, an early phase clinical trial at King's Health Partners in London has recently commenced, the success of which could ultimately lead to a revolution in diagnosis of epilepsy by enabling diagnosis from markers that are present even in the absence of seizures; reducing time spent in clinic and increasing accuracy of diagnosis. Indeed it may even make diagnosis in the GP clinic a reality. However, epilepsy is just the tip of the iceberg! Patient-specific mathematical models have the potential to revolutionise a wide range of clinical conditions. For example, early diagnosis of dementia could enable much more effective use of existing medication and result in enhanced quality and quantity of life for millions of people. For other conditions, such as cortisolism and diabetes where a range of treatment options exist, identifying the optimal medication, and the pattern of its delivery, based upon the profile of the individual will enable us to maximise efficacy, whilst minimising unwanted side effects.

Serious illness and bereavement affect us all, but our experiences of them are not equal. People living in the poorest areas of the UK are less likely to get the care and support they need if they become seriously ill or a loved one dies. They are also more likely to be socially isolated and lonely - which can be made even worse by serious illness or bereavement. This project is based in Weston-super-Mare, a deprived coastal town in North Somerset. Nine of its neighbourhoods are among the poorest 10% in the country. The population is growing, getting older and living with more frailty and long-term, complex health conditions. There are also high levels of mental health and addiction problems. The project team will create a strong group with a shared aim ('a consortium') that unites health and social care workers, people providing community assets (collective resources which are available to individuals and communities, e.g. arts organisations, charities and community groups), academics, and people with lived experience to work together to reduce health inequities in Weston-super-Mare and the North Somerset region. Our consortium will focus on inequities related to end-of-life care, bereavement support, social isolation and loneliness. During the 9 months of the project, we will hold 3 consortium meetings and work together to: 1. create a directory of community assets and interview key people to understand how health and social care and community assets can best work together 2. design and evaluate creative and cultural activities to be held over Dying Matters Awareness Week (DMAW, May 2023), with members of the public employed as co-researchers 3. hold creative workshops with local groups (people with drug and alcohol addiction problems, young people, and older men) to facilitate conversations about grief and illness, raise awareness of local support, and help inform our DMAW events 4. review existing evaluation data from arts/creative organisations working in Weston-super-Mare over the last 5 years (2017-2022) to identify what activities have best engaged and benefitted the community, and draw on this in designing DMAW events 5. map available health and social care data and determine how it can be used to help understand, measure and reduce inequities 6. hold a final consortium meeting to: review all our work; consider how we can apply our findings in other deprived coastal towns; and agree research questions and methods for a future joint funding application The project will benefit: 1) the Integrated Care System (ICS), strengthening their relationships with community organisations and the public in Weston-super-Mare and providing information (community asset directory, map of datasets) to enable equitable end-of-life care and bereavement support; 2) community organisations, by bringing recognition and funding (via linking with the ICS) and helping them reach more people (via linking with the consortium and awareness raising at events); 3) creative and cultural organisations, by enabling them to engage and empower local community members in an evidence-based way, providing training to artists and increasing links with the ICS and community organisations; 4) members of the public, who will learn about the care and support available to them via the ICS and community assets and benefit from opportunities to express their experiences and socialise in creative workshops, attend free events, participate as co-researchers and at consortium meetings; 5) academic researchers, by modelling new multidisciplinary, collaborative ways of creating research and building evidence about how community assets can help reduce health inequities; 6) policy makers, by making recommendations for how ICSs can best harness community assets. We will engage with these groups via consortium meetings, blogs, the project website, journal articles, reports, presentations at community/ICS events and a policy brief.

The offer, interpretation and consequences of genetic testing raise complex issues for counsellors, patients and families. These have received much attention but one important area that is little understood is how patients come to a decision about taking a genetic test (or not). Much is known about how people retrospectively describe their decision-making process and the effects of genetic knowledge on themselves and their families but less is known about how counsellors discuss the implications of taking genetic tests with patients and much less is known about how people make their decisions. By following people during this process, we aim to improve our understanding of how their thinking develops and the other people and factors that influence this. This is particularly important at a time when ever more information about genetics is communicated online, in newspapers and in popular culture, and as families gain more experience of dealing with genetics services. Our proposal is to focus on cases where the decision to take a genetic test is for the patient to make, supported by genetic counselling but without a clinical recommendation, as the genetic test result is of limited clinical utility. Using multiple methods, we propose to examine the communicative context in which patients make their decisions and how their thinking unfolds in this context. We will focus on the experiences of three groups of patients: patients seeking predictive genetic testing for a neuro-degenerative condition (e.g. Huntington's Disease, HD); patients seeking predictive genetic testing for a condition where testing has little utility or it is deferred; and prospective parents seeking pre-natal genetic testing, either for a known familial risk or following an antenatal foetal anomaly ultrasound scan. These cases will illuminate different experiences that patients may have in deciding on a genetic test. The case of HD will show how a patient settles on a decision to take a test knowing a 'bad' outcome foretells a future of impairment. The predictive test of little or deferred utility will mostly involve young adults and will illuminate the experience of wrestling with a decision in a formative period in life with no immediate clinical implications. Prospective parents working with the genetics service in light of a familial risk of a genetic condition will illuminate the importance of personal and family experience in the decision process, while those referred after an ultrasound anomaly scan will shed light on the experience of adjusting to unexpected information in a short period of time. In each case, patients and their families are faced with complex information about tests, testing pathways and potential outcomes. By following people as they make their decision we will observe the clinical encounters and the patients will gather information on their own thoughts, on what people are saying to them, and what other information they are seeking or interacting with. While fully aware of the need for great ethical sensitivity in this enquiry, we will document how genetic information from outside the clinic (as framed by scientists, marketers, journalists, charities and special interest groups) is brought into the clinic discussion and the patients' reports of their own thinking. The conversations between patients and counsellors in clinic are important to this process, but this conversation is increasingly relativized by rapidly evolving scientific insights and supplemented by outside perspectives. Combining insights from all involved will enable us to develop our understanding of how patients come to their decision, and the effect of outside ideas and framings on this process. Simultaneously, by comparing the thinking of the different groups of patients, we will gain insight into the effect of different experiences of time on this thinking, and explore whether and how these reflections might be facilitated by decision support tools.