'I could have been more...': Galgotias professor Neha Singh on Robodog row at India AI Impact Summit
&imwidth=600&imheight=450&format=webp&quality=medium "'I could have been more...': Galgotias professor Neha Singh on Robodog row at India AI Impact Summit")
Neha Singh Photograph: (X)
After a viral video sparked controversy, a Galgotias professor clarified that the robot dog was purchased for learning, not developed in-house
A day after a video clip triggered an online debate about the origin of a robot dog displayed at Galgotias University’s stall during the India AI Impact Summit 2026, Professor Neha Singh addressed the controversy, saying her comments were poorly phrased and led to misunderstanding. Singh explained that her earlier remarks were made in haste amid the excitement of the summit. She emphasised there was no attempt to misrepresent the machine’s ownership or origins. “I could have been more eloquent. I could have been more articulate. Because of the euphoria and rush, things went a little hither-thither, which was never the intention. The branding has not been changed,” she said while speaking to Hindustan Times, expressing regret over the way her words were conveyed and perceived.
Clarifies robot was acquired, not built in-house
The controversy began after a short video circulated online showing Singh referring to the robot dog, named “Orion” at the university stall, as having been developed by the institution’s Centre of Excellence. Social media users later identified the quadruped as a commercially manufactured robot created by the Chinese company Unitree Robotics.
During the interview, Singh clarified that the robot was purchased as part of the university’s artificial intelligence initiatives and serves as a practical learning tool for students rather than an in-house creation. “We cannot own something which is not curated by us, by our students. That is not our legacy and value system as an academic institution,” she said. She also rejected suggestions of any attempt to conceal facts, noting that the robot was displayed transparently as part of the university’s technology showcase.
Explaining her earlier use of the word “developed,” Singh said she meant the process of students working with advanced technologies to build their own innovations. “We expose them to cutting-edge technologies. They study, experiment, innovate, and develop something out of it,” she said. Addressing criticism that the clarification followed social media backlash, Singh maintained that the university would have corrected the narrative in any case.
Trending Stories
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
)
“If this had not been noticed by people, we would still have clarified. We cannot claim something that is not built by our students,” she said, reiterating the institution’s commitment to transparency and academic ethics. Describing the situation as a misunderstanding driven by perspective, she remarked, “You’re maintaining your six, somebody else’s nine, that’s what happened.”
Robot moved back to university labs
Amid speculation about the robot’s disappearance from the exhibition floor, Singh confirmed that it has since been relocated to university laboratories for academic use. “It was procured to be in the labs for the students to do all the anatomy, all the research and development. It is there,” she said. She also encouraged greater focus on the AI applications created by students that were on display at the pavilion.
