Advertisement

Cognitive Computation

, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 104–117 | Cite as

On the Role of Emotion in Embodied Cognitive Architectures: From Organisms to Robots

  • Tom ZiemkeEmail author
  • Robert Lowe
Article

Abstract

The computational modeling of emotion has been an area of growing interest in cognitive robotics research in recent years, but also a source of contention regarding how to conceive of emotion and how to model it. In this paper, emotion is characterized as (a) closely connected to embodied cognition, (b) grounded in homeostatic bodily regulation, and (c) a powerful organizational principle—affective modulation of behavioral and cognitive mechanisms—that is ‘useful’ in both biological brains and robotic cognitive architectures. We elaborate how emotion theories and models centered on core neurological structures in the mammalian brain, and inspired by embodied, dynamical, and enactive approaches in cognitive science, may impact on computational and robotic modeling. In light of the theoretical discussion, work in progress on the development of an embodied cognitive-affective architecture for robots is presented, incorporating aspects of the theories discussed.

Keywords

Affect Cognitive architectures Cognitive robotics Computational modeling Embodied cognition Emotion Grounding Homeostasis Motivation Organisms 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by a European Commission grant to the FP6 project “Integrating Cognition, Emotion and Autonomy” (ICEA, FP6-IST-027819, www.ICEAproject.eu) as part of the European Cognitive Systems initiative. Much of this paper has resulted from discussions with other members of the project consortium. The authors would also like to thank the reviewers, Kevin Gurney, Amir Hussain, and India Morrison for useful comments on a draft version of this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Alexander WH, Sporns O. An embodied model of learning, plasticity, and reward. Adapt Behav. 2002;10(3–4):143–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arbib M, Fellous J-M. Emotions: From brain to robot. Trend Cognit Sci. 2004;8(12):554–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barandiaran X, Moreno A. On what makes certain dynamical systems cognitive: A minimally cognitive organization program. Adapt Behav. 2006;14(2):171–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barandiaran X, Moreno A. Adaptivity: From metabolism to behavior. Adapt Behav. 2008;16:325–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barnes MB, Beverly JL. Nitric oxide’s role in glucose homeostasis. Am J Physiol Regulat Integr Comp Physiol. 2007;293:R590–1.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bechara A, Damasio AR. The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision. Games Econ Behav. 2005;52:336–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Breazeal C. Designing sociable robots. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2002.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Breazeal C. Emotion and sociable humanoid robots. Int J Human Comput Interact. 2003;59:119–55.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brooks RA. Achieving artificial intelligence through building robots. Technical report memo 899, MIT AI Lab; 1986Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brooks RA. Cambrian intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cañamero L, editor. Proceedings of the symposium on agents that want and like: Motivational and emotional roots of cognition and action. UK: AISB; 2005. ISBN: 1-902956-41-7.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clark A. Being there. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clark A. An embodied cognitive science? Trend Cognit Sci. 1999;9:345–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Colombetti G, Thompson E. Enacting emotional interpretations with feelings. Behav Brain Sci. 2005;28:200–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Colombetti G, Thompson E. The feeling body: Towards an enactive approach to emotion. In: Overton WF, Müller U, Newman JL, editors. Developmental perspectives on embodiment and consciousness. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2008. p. 45–68.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Craig AD. Interoception: The sense of the physiological condition of the body. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2003;13(4):500–5.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Craig AD. Human feelings: Why are some more aware than others? Trend Cognit Sci. 2004;8(6):239–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Damasio AR. Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: GP Putnam’s Sons; 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Damasio AR. Emotion in the perspective of an integrated nervous system. Brain Res Rev. 1998;26:83–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Damasio AR. The feeling of what happens: Body, emotion and the making of consciousness. London: Vintage; 1999.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Damasio AR. Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow and the feeling brain. Orlando, FL: Harcourt; 2003.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Damasio AR. Emotions and feelings: A neurobiological perspective. In Manstead A, Frijda N, Fischer A, editors. Feelings and emotions—The Amsterdam symposium. UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Di Paolo EA. Organismically-inspired robotics: Homeostatic adaptation and natural teleology beyond the closed sensorimotor loop. In: Murase K, Asakura T, editors. Dynamical systems approach to embodiment and sociality. Adelaide, Australia: Advanced Knowledge International; 2003. p. 19–42.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Edelman J. The remembered present. New York: Basic Books; 1989.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ekman P. Universals and cultural differences in facial expression of emotion. In: Cole J, editor. Nebraska symposium on motivation. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press; 1972. p. 207–83.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ekman P. Basic emotions. In: Dalgleish T, Power M, editors. Handbook of cognition and emotion. Sussex, UK: Wiley; 1999.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fellous J-M. Neuromodulatory basis of emotion. The Neuroscientist. 1999;5:283–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fellous J-M, Arbib M, editors. Who needs emotions? The brain meets the robot. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Freeman W. How brains make up their minds. New York: Columbia University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Froese T, Ziemke T. Enactive artificial intelligence. Artif Intel. 2009;173:466–500.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gibbs R. Embodiment and cognitive science. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Harnad S. Minds, machines, and Searle. J Exp Theoret Artif Intel. 1989;1(1):5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Harnad S. The symbol grounding problem. Physica D. 1990;42:335–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hudlicka E, Cañamero L, editors. Architectures for modeling emotion: Cross-disciplinary foundations. Papers from the 2004 AAAI symposium. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kelley AE. Neurochemical networks encoding emotion and motivation: An evolutionary perspective. In: Fellous J-M, Arbib MA, editors. Who needs emotions? The brain meets the robot. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lazarus RS. Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press; 1991.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    LeDoux JE. The emotional brain. New York: Simon & Schuster; 1996.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    LeDoux JE. Emotion circuits in the brain. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2000;23:155–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lewis MD. Bridging emotion theory and neurobiology through dynamic systems modeling. Behav Brain Sci. 2005;28:169–245.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lowe R, Herrera C, Morse T, Ziemke T. The embodied dynamics of emotion, appraisal and attention. In: Paletta L, Rome E, editors. Attention in cognitive systems. Theories and systems from an interdisciplinary viewpoint. Berlin: Springer; 2007.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lowe R, Philippe P, Montebelli A, Morse A, Ziemke T. Affective modulation of embodied dynamics. In: The role of emotion in adaptive behaviour and cognitive robotics, Electronic proceedings of SAB workshop, Osaka, Japan; 2008. Available from: http://www.his.se/icea/emotion-workshop/.
  42. 42.
    Lowe R, Morse A, Ziemke T. An enactive approach for modeling cognition, emotion and autonomy: Predictive regulation at different levels of organizational complexity. Submitted for journal publication.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lowe R, Humphries M, Ziemke T. The dual-route hypothesis: Evaluating a neurocomputational model of fear conditioning in rats. Connect Sci., accepted for publication (in press).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lowe R, Morse A, Ziemke T. The Iowa gambling task: Key methodological issues for cognitive robotics to address. (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    McFarland D. Guilty robots, happy dogs. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    McFarland D, Spier E. Basic cycles, utility and opportunism in self-sufficient robots. Robot Autonom Syst. 1997;20:179–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Melhuish C, Ieropoulos I, Greenman J, Horsfield I. Energetically autonomous robots: Food for thought. Autonom Robot. 2006;21:187–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Meyer J-A, Guillot A, Girard B, Khamassi M, Pirim P, Berthoz A. The Psikharpax project: Towards building an artificial rat. Robot Autonom Syst. 2005;50(4):211–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Moreno A, Etxeberria A, Umerez J. The autonomy of biological individuals and artificial models. BioSystems. 2008;91(2):309–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Morse A, Lowe R. Enacting emotions: Somato-sensorimotor knowledge. In: Perception, action and consciousness: Sensorimotor dynamics and dual vision, Bristol, UK; 2007. Available at: http://www.bris.ac.uk/philosophy/department/events/PAC_conference/index.html/Conference.htm/Poster_Announcement.html.
  51. 51.
    Morse A, Lowe R, Ziemke T. Towards an enactive cognitive architecture. In: Proceedings of the first international conference on cognitive systems, CogSys 2008, Karlsruhe, Germany; April 2008.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Morrison I, Ziemke T. Empathy with computer game characters: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. In: AISB’05: Proceedings of the joint symposium on virtual social agents. UK: AISB; 2005. p. 73–9.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ortony A, Norman D, Revelle W. Affect and Proto-affect in effective functioning. In: Fellous J-M, Arbib MA, editors. Who need emotions? New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Panksepp J. Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Panksepp J. The neurodynamics of emotions: An evolutionary-neurodevelopmental view. In: Lewis MD, Granic I, editors. Emotion, development, and self-organization: Dynamic systems approaches to emotional development. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Panksepp J. Affective consciousness and the origins of human mind: A critical role of brain research on animal emotions. Impuls. 2004;57:47–60.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Panksepp J. Affective consciousness: Core emotional feelings in animals and humans. Conscious Cogn. 2005;14:30–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Parisi D. Internal robotics. Connect Sci. 2004;16(4):325–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Pessoa L. On the relationship between emotion and cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008;9:148–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Petta P. The role of emotion in a tractable architecture for situated cognizers. In: Trappl R, Petta P, Payr S, editors. Emotions in humans and artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Pfeifer R, Bongard J. How the body shapes the way we think: A new view of intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pfeifer R, Scheier C. Understanding intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Phelps E. Emotion and cognition: Insights from studies of the human amygdala. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;24(57):27–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Prescott TJ, Redgrave P, Gurney K. Layered control architectures in robots and vertebrates. Adapt Behav. 1999;7:99–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Prinz JJ. Gut reactions–A perceptual theory of emotion. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rolls E. The brain and emotion. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Rolls E. Emotion explained. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Seth A. Explanatory correlates of consciousness: Theoretical and computational challenges. Cognit Comput.; this volume. doi: 10.1007/s12559-009-9007-x.
  69. 69.
    Sloman A. Beyond shallow models of emotion. Cognit Process. 2001;2(1):177–98.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Sloman A. How many separately evolved emotional beasties live within us? In: Trappl R, Petta P, Payr S, editors. Emotions in humans and artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2002. p. 35–114.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Steels L, Brooks RA, editors. The artificial life route to artificial intelligence. Building situated embodied agents. New Haven: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1995.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Sterling P. Principles of allostasis: Optimal design, predictive regulation, pathophysiology and rational therapeutics. In: Schulkin J, editor. Allostasis, homeostasis and the costs of adaptation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Thompson E. Mind in life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2007.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Trappl R, Petta P, Payr S, editors. Emotions in humans and artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Varela FJ, Depraz N. At the source of time: Valence and the constitutional dynamics of affect. J. Conscious. Stud.. 2005;12(8–10):61–81.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Varela FJ, Thompson E, Rosch E. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1991.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Vernon D, Metta G, Sandini G. A survey of artificial cognitive systems: Implications for the autonomous development of mental capabilities in computational agents. IEEE Trans Evol Comput. 2007;11(2):151–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Ziemke T. Rethinking grounding. In: Riegler A, Peschl M, von Stein A, editors. Understanding representation in the cognitive sciences. New York: Plenum Press; 1999. p. 177–90.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Ziemke T. Are robots embodied? In: Balkenius C, Zlatev J, Breazeal C, Dautenhahn K, Kozima H, editors. Proceedings of the first international workshop on epigenetic robotics: Modelling cognitive development in robotic system; Lund University cognitive studies, vol. 85, Lund, Sweden; 2001. p. 75–83.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Ziemke T. What’s that thing called embodiment? In: Alterman R, Kirsh D, editors. Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2003. p. 1305–10.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Ziemke T. Embodied AI as science: Models of embodied cognition, embodied models of cognition, or both? In: Iida F, Pfeifer R, Steels L, Kuniyoshi Y, editors. Embodied artificial intelligence. Heidelberg: Springer; 2004. p. 27–36.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Ziemke T. What’s life got to do with it? In: Chella A, Manzotti R, editors. Artificial consciousness. Exeter: Imprint Academic; 2007. p. 48–66.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Ziemke T. The embodied self: Theories, hunches and robot models. J Conscious Stud. 2007;14(7):167–79.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Ziemke T. On the role of emotion in biological and robotic autonomy. BioSystems. 2008;91:401–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Ziemke T, Sharkey NE. A stroll through the worlds of robots and animals. Semiotica. 2001;134(1–4):701–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Ziemke T, Frank R, Zlatev J, editors. Body, language and mind. Volume 1: Embodiment. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter; 2007.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Informatics Research Centre, School of Humanities & InformaticsUniversity of SkövdeSkövdeSweden

Personalised recommendations