Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Agent-Oriented Simulation

  • Chapter
Applied System Simulation

Abstract

Metaphors play a key role in computer science and engineering. Agents bring the notion of locality of information (as in object-oriented programming) together with locality of intent or purpose. The relation between multi-agent and simulation systems is multi-facetted. Simulation systems are used to evaluate software agents in virtual dynamic environments. Agents become part of the model design, if autonomous entities in general, and human or social actors in particular shall be modeled. A couple of research projects shall illuminate some of these facets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. N. R. Jennings, K. Sycara and M. Wooldridge, “A Roadmap of Agent Research and Development”, Int. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 1(1) 7–38, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. A. M. Uhrmacher, P. A. Fishwick and B. P. Zeigler (Eds), “Special Issue: Agents in Modeling and Simulation: Exploiting the Metaphor”. Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol.89, No.2, 127–213, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. Drogoul and J. Ferber, “Multi-Agent Simulation as a Tool for Modeling Societies: Application to Social Differentiation in Ant Colonies”, Proceedings of MAAMAW’92, Viterbo, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  4. O.-J Dahl and K. Nygaard, “Simula: an ALGOL-based simulation language”. Communications of the ACM; 9(1966). New York: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 671–682, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  5. B. P. Zeigler, Object-Oriented Simulation with Hierarchical, Modular Models — Intelligente Agents and Endomorphic Systems. San-Diego: Academic Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Fritzson and V. Engelson, “Modelica — A Unified Object-Oriented Language for System Modeling and Simulation”. ECOOP’98 (the 12th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming), Brussels, Belgium, July 20-24, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  7. L. von Bertalanffy, General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, George Brazillar, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  8. B. P. Zeigler, Multifacetted Modelling and Discrete Event Simulation. London: Academic Press, 1984.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. M. Bunge, Ontology II: A World of Systems, Treatise of Basic Philosophy, Vol. 4, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Doran, N. Gilbert, U. Müller and K. G. Troitzsch, “Object-Oriented and Agent-Oriented Simulation — Implications for Social Science Applications”. In: Social Science Micro Simulation — A Challenge for Computer Science, Springer Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, pp. 432–447, Berlin, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  11. N. Gilbert and J. Doran, “Simulating Societies”. Computer Simulation of Social Phenomena, UCL Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. L. Deangelis and L. J. Gross (Eds.), Individual-Based Models and Approaches in Ecology: Populations, Communities and Ecosystems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  13. E. Carpentier, “Famines et épidémies dans l’histoire du XIVe siécle”. Annales. Economies. Societies. Civilisations, Vol 17, pp. 1062–1094, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. D. Lee, “Population dynamics: equilibrium, disequilibrium, and consequences of fluctuations”. In: M. R. Rosenzweig and O. Stark (Eds.), Handbook of Population Economics, Ch. 19, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  15. U. C. Ewert, M. Röhl and A. M. Uhrmacher, “The role of deliberative agents in analyzing crises in pre-modern towns”, Sozionik aktuell, (3), 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. M. Uhrmacher, “A system theoretic approach to constructing test beds for multi-agent systems”. In F. Cellier and H. Sarjoughian (Eds.) A Tapestry of Systems and AI-Based Modeling and Simulation Theories and Methodologies: A Tribute to the 60th Birthday of B. P. Zeigler, New York: Springer-Verlag, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Doran, “From Computer Simulation to Artificial Societies”. SCS Transaction on Computer Simulation, Vol.14, No. 2, pp.69–78, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Wooldridge and N. R. Jennings, “Pitfalls of Agent-Oriented Development”. In: K. P. Sycara and M. Wooldridge (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents’98), New York: ACM Press, pp. 385–391, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost and E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied Confersational Agents. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  20. W. L. Johnson, J. Rickel and J. C. Lester, “Animated Pedagogical Agents: Face-to-Face Interaction in Interactive Learning Environments”, International Journal of AI in Education, 11, 47–78, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  21. N. I. Badler, C. B Phillips and B.L. Webber, Simulating Humans. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. D. Thalmann, D., “Human Modeling and Animation”. In Eurographics’ 93 State-of-the-Art Reports, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. Cassell, T. Bickmore, L.Campbell, H. Vilhjálmsson and H. Yan, “Human conversation as a system framework: Designing embodied conversational agents”. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost and E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied Conversational Agents (pp. 29–63). Boston: MIT Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  24. J. Cassell, C. Pelachaud, N. Badler, M. Steedman, B. Achorn, T. Becket, et al. Animated Conversation: Rule-Based Generation of Facial Expression, Gesture and Spoken Intonation for Multiple Conversational Agents. Paper presented at the ACM SIGGRAPH, Reading, MA, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  25. C. Pelachaud, N. I. Badler and M. Steedman, “Generating Facial Expressions for Speech”, Cognitive Science, 20(1), 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J. C. Lester, S. G. Towns, C. B. Callaway, J. L. Voerman and P. J. FitzGerald, “Deictic and Emotive Communication in Animated Pedagogical Agents”. In J. Cassell, S. Prevost, J. Sullivan and E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied Conversational Agents, pp. 123–154. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  27. S. Marsella, W. L. Johnson and C. LaBore, “Interactive Pedagogical Drama”. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Autonomous Agents, Montreal, Canada, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  28. I. Poggi and C. Pelachaud, “Emotional Meaning and Expression in Performative Faces”. In A. Paiva (Ed.), Affective Interactions: Towards a New Generation of Computer Interfaces. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  29. J. Rickel and W. L. Johnson, “Animated Agents for Procedural Training in Virtual Reality: Perception, Cognition, and Motor Control”, Applied Artificial Intelligence, 73, pp. 343–382, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. J. Rickel and W. L. Johnson, “Virtual Humans for Team Training in Virtual Reality”. Paper presented at the Ninth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  31. J. Rickel and W. L. Johnson, “Task-Oriented Collaboration with Embodied Agents in Virtual Worlds”. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost and E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied Conversational Agents. Boston: MIT Press, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  32. J. Rickel and W. L. Johnson, “Extending Virtual Humans to Support Team Training”. In G. Lakemayer and B. Nebel (Eds.), Exploring Artificial Intelligence in the New Millenium, pp. 217–238. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  33. D. McAllester and D. Rosenblitt, “Systematic Nonlinear Planning”, Paper presented at the Ninth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park, CA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  34. J. Rickel, S. Marsella, J. Gratch, R. Hill, D. Traum, and W. Swartout, “Toward a New Generation of Virtual Humans for Interactive Experiences”, IEEE Intelligent Systems, July/August, pp.32–38, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  35. D. Wang and S. Narayanan, “A confidence-score based unsupervised MAP adaptation for speech recognition”. Paper presented at the Proceedings of 36th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  36. D. Traum and J. Rickel, “Embodied Agents for Multi-party Dialogue in Immersive Virtual Worlds”. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, Bologna, Italy, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  37. M. Fleischman and E. Hovy, “Emotional variation in speech-based natural language generation”. Paper presented at the International Natural Language Generation Conference, Arden House, NY, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  38. W. L. Johnson, S. Narayanan, R. Whitney, R. Das, M. Bulut and C. LaBore, “Limited domain synthesis of expressive military speech for animated characters”. In Proceedings of ICSLP Workshop on Text-to-Speech Synthesis, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  39. S. Marsella and J. Gratch, “A Step Toward Irrationality: Usign Emotion to Change Belief”. Paper presented at the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Bologna, Italy, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  40. J. Cassell, H. Vilhjálmsson, and T. Bickmore, “BEAT: The Behavior Expressive Animation Toolkit”. Paper presented at the SIGGRAPH, Los Angeles, CA, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  41. P. Wegner, “Why Interaction Is More Powerful Than Algorithms”. Communications of the ACM, Vol.40, No.5, May 1997, pp.81–91, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. M. Luck and M. d’Inverno, “A Conceptual Framework for Agent Definition and Development”, The Computer Journal,, 44(1), pp. 1–20, 2001.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. A. S. Rao and M. L. Georgeff, “A model theoretic approach to the verification of situation reasoning systems”. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 318–324, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  44. H. Xu and S. M. Shatz, “A Framework for Model-Based Design of Agent-Oriented Software,” To appear in IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  45. S. Hanks, M. E. Pollack and P. R. Cohen. “Benchmarks, Test Beds, Controlled Experimentation, and the Design of Agent Architectures”. In AI Magazine, vol.14, no.4, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  46. M. Asada, H. Kitano, I. Noda, M. M. Veloso, “RoboCup: Today and Tomorrow — What we have learned”, Artificial Intelligence 110(2): 193–214, 1999.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. M. P. Wellman, A. Greenwald, P. Stone, and P. R. Wurman, “The 2001 Trading Agent Competition”, Fourteenth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, pp. 935–941, Edmonton, July 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  48. D. S. Weld, “Recent Advances in AI Planning”. AI Magazine 20(2): 93–123, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  49. N. R. Jennings, “On Agent-Based Software Engineering”, Artificial Intelligence, 117(2) 277–296, 2000.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. J. F. Horty and M. E. Pollack, “Option Evaluation in Context,” Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK), Chicago, IL, July 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  51. D. Joslin, A. Nunes and M. E. Pollack, “TileWorld Users’ Manual,” University of Pittsburgh Tech. Report TR 93-12, August, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  52. B. Schattenberg and A. M. Uhrmacher, “Planning Agents in James”, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 89, No. 2, pp.158–173, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Blum and M. Fürst, “Fast Planning Through Planning Graph Analysis”, Artificial Intelligence, 90:281–300, 1997.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. M. Montemerlo, J. Pineau, N. Roy, S. Thrun, and V. Verma, “Experiences with a Mobile Robotic Guide for the Elderly”, Proceedings of the AAAI National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  55. C. E. McCarthy and M. E. Pollack, “A Plan-Based Personalized Cognitive Orthotic”, 6th International Conference on AI Planning and Scheduling, April 2002.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Rostock, University of Southern California, Southern California

    Adelinde Uhrmacher & William Swartout

Authors
  1. Adelinde Uhrmacher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William Swartout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Monmouth University, USA

    Mohammad S. Obaidat

  2. Aristotle University, Greece

    Georgios I. Papadimitriou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Uhrmacher, A., Swartout, W. (2003). Agent-Oriented Simulation. In: Obaidat, M.S., Papadimitriou, G.I. (eds) Applied System Simulation. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9218-5_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9218-5_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-4843-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-9218-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation