A day after a viral video sparked controversy over the origin of a robot dog displayed at the Galgotias University stall at the India AI Impact Summit 2026, Professor Neha Singh has acknowledged that her remarks were not clearly articulated and expressed regret over how they were interpreted.
“I could have been more eloquent. I could have been more articulate,” Galgotias professor Neha Singh said. (HT Photo)
In an exclusive interview with Hindustan Times at the expo venue, Singh said the controversy stemmed from hurried communication and enthusiasm at the event, not from any intention to falsely claim ownership of the machine.
“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, adding that she regrets how the statement was delivered and received.
‘Not manufactured by us, meant for student learning’
The row began after a short video clip showed Neha Singh describing the robodog, named “Orion” at the Galgotias stall, as having been developed by the university’s Centre of Excellence. Online users later identified the machine as a quadruped robot made by Chinese firm Unitree Robotics.
In the interview with HT, Singh clarified that the robot dog was procured as part of the university’s AI investments and meant as a hands-on learning platform for students – not as an in-house invention.
Also Read | Galgotias University asked to vacate AI Summit after row over Chinese robodog, power at stall cut off
“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, stressing that there was nothing “clandestine” about the display and that the technology was being showcased openly as part of experimentation and exposure.
She explained that when she earlier used the word “developed,” she was referring to how students would study, experiment on, and build further innovations using such technologies. “We expose them to cutting-edge technologies. They study, experiment, innovate and develop something out of it,” she said.
‘Would have clarified anyway’
Responding to criticism that the clarification came only after social media backlash, Singh said the university would have corrected the impression regardless.
“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, adding that the institution stands by its academic values and transparency.
She described the episode as a matter of interpretation, saying, “You’re maintaining your six, somebody else’s nine — that’s what happened.”
Where is the robodog now?
Amid questions over the robot dog’s removal from the stall, Singh said the machine has been moved back to the university labs 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, while urging attention toward student-built AI applications also being showcased at the pavilion.