Skip to main content

A formal model of emotions for an empathic rational dialog agent


Recent research has shown that virtual agents expressing empathic emotions toward users have the potential to enhance human–machine interaction. To provide empathic capabilities to a rational dialog agent, we propose a formal model of emotions based on an empirical and theoretical analysis of the users’ conditions of emotion elicitation. The emotions are represented by particular mental states of the agent, composed of beliefs, uncertainties and intentions. This semantically grounded formal representation enables a rational dialog agent to identify from a dialogical situation the empathic emotion that it should express. An implementation and an evaluation of an empathic rational dialog agent have enabled us to validate the proposed model of empathy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. Adam, C., Gaudou, B., Herzig, A., & Longin, D. (2006). OCC’s emotions: A formalization in a BDI logic. In J. Euzenat & J. Domingue (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference on artificial intelligence: Methodology, systems, applications (AIMSA) 2006 (pp. 24–32), Varna, Bulgarie. Berlin: Springer.

  2. André E., Klesen P., Gebhard P., Allen S., Rist T. (2001) Integrating models of personality and emotions into lifelike characters. Springer, Berlin, pp 150–165

    Google Scholar 

  3. Austin J. L. (1962) How to do things with words. Oxford University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bates J. (1994) The role of emotion in believable agents. Communications of the ACM (CACM) 37(7): 122–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Becker C., Wachsmuth I., Prendinger H., Ishizuka M. (2005) Evaluating affective feedback of the 3D agent max in a competitive cards game. In: Tao J., Tan T., Picard R.W. (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on affective computing and intelligent interaction (ACII). Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brave S., Nass C., Hutchinson K. (2005) Computers that care: Investigating the effects of orientation of emotion exhibited by an embodied computer agent. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 62: 161–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Breton, G., Bouville, C., & Pelé, D. (2000). FaceEngine: A 3D facial animation engine for real time applications. In Web3D Symposium, Germany.

  8. Broekens J., DeGroot D., Kosters W. A. (2008) Formal models of appraisal: Theory, specification, and computational model. Cognitive Systems Research 9: 173–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carofiglio, V., & deRosis, F. (2005). In favour of cognitive models of emotions. In: the Proceedings of the Joint symposium on virtual social agents, conference on Artificial intelligence and simulated behavior (AISB) (pp. 171–176). Hatfield, UK.

  10. Castelfranchi C. (2000) Affective appraisal versus cognitive evaluation in social emotions and interactions. In: Paiva A. M. (eds) Affective interactions: Towards a new generation of computer interfaces. Springer, Berlin, pp 76–106

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chovil N. (1991) Social determinants of facial displays. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 15: 141–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cohen P. R., Levesque H. J. (1990) Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence 42(2-3): 213–232

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. deRosis F., Pelachaud C., Poggi I., Carofiglio V., De Carolis B. (2003) From Greta’s mind to her face: Modelling the dynamics of affective states in a conversational embodied agent. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 59(1-2): 81–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. DuyBui, T. (2004). Creating emotions and facial expressions for embodied agents. PhD thesis, University of Twente.

  15. Dyer Michael G. (1987) Emotions and their computations: Three computer models. Cognition and Emotion 1(3): 323–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Elliot, C. (1992). The affective reasoner: A process model of emotions in a multi-agent system. PhD thesis, Northwestern University.

  17. Fagin R., Halpern J. (1994) Reasoning about knowledge and probability. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 41(2): 340–367

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. FIPA-ACL. (2002).

  19. Frijda N., Ortony A., Sonnemans J., Clore G.L. (1992) The complexity of intensity: Issues concerning the structure of emotion intensity. In: Clark M.S. (eds) Emotion: Review of Personality and Social Psychology. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gratch, J. (2000). Socially situated planning. In AAAI fall symposium on socially intelligent agents—The human in the loop. Sea Crest Resort, North Falmouth.

  21. Gratch J., Marsella S. (2004) A domain-independent framework for modeling emotion. Journal of Cognitive Systems Research 5(4): 269–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hakansson, J. (2003). Exploring the phenomenon of empathy. PhD thesis, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University.

  23. JADE. (2001).

  24. Jaques, P., & Viccari, R. M. (2004). A BDI approach to infer student’s emotions. In the Proceedings of the Ibero-American conference on Artificial intelligence (IBERAMIA) (pp. 901–911). Berlin: Springer.

  25. Johnson W. L., Rickel J. W., Lester J. C. (2000) Animated pedagogical agents: Face-to-face interaction in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 11: 47–78

    Google Scholar 

  26. Jorland, G. (2004). L’empathie: histoire d’un concept. In Empathie et connaissance d’autrui. Paris: Odile Jacob.

  27. Klein, J., Moon, Y., & Picard, R. (1999). This computer responds to user frustration. In Proceedings of the conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 242–243). Pittsburgh: ACM Press.

  28. Kripke S. A. (1963) Semantical considerations on modal logic. Acta philosophica Fennica 16: 83–94

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Lazarus Richard S. (1991) Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  30. Louis V., Martinez T. (2005) An operational model for the FIPA-ACL semantics. In: Pechoucek M., Republic C., Steiner D., Thompson S. (eds) Proceedings of AAMAS (International joint conference on Autonomous agents and multi-agent systems) workshop on agent communication. ACM Press, Utrecht, pp 1–14

    Google Scholar 

  31. Louis, V., & Martinez, T. (2007). JADE semantics framework. In: Developing multi-agent systems with JADE (pp. 225–246). Chichester: Wiley.

  32. McQuiggan, S., & Lester, J. (2006). Learning empathy: A data-driven framework for modeling empathetic companion agents. In: P. Stone & G. Weiss (Eds.), Proceedings of AAMAS. Hakodate, Japan.

  33. McQuiggan S., Lester J. (2007) Modeling and evaluating empathy in embodied companion agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65: 348–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Meyer J. J. Ch. (2006) Reasoning about emotional agents: Research articles. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 21(6): 601–619

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Oatley K. (1994) Best Laid Schemes, the psychology of emotions. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ochs, M., Pelachaud, C., & Sadek, D. (2007). Emotion elicitation in an empathic virtual dialog agent. In Proceedings of the Second European cognitive science conference (EuroCogSci). Deplhi.

  37. Omdahl Becky L. (1995) Cognitive appraisal, emotion, and empathy. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ortony A., Clore G. L., Collins A. (1988) The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Pacherie, E. (2004). L’empathie et ses degrés. L’empathie et ses degrés. In A. de Berthoz & G. Jorland (Eds.), (pp. 149–181). L’empathie (pp. 149–181). Paris: Odile Jacob.

  40. Paiva A., Dias J., Sobral D., Woods S., Hall L. (2004) Building empathic lifelike characters: The proximity factor. In: Paiva A., Aylett R., Marsella S. (eds) Proceedings of AAMAS, Workshop on empathic agents. USA, New York

    Google Scholar 

  41. Partala T., Surakka V. (2004) The effects of affective interventions in human–computer interaction. Interacting with Computers 16: 295–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Picard R. (1997) Affective computing. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  43. Picard R. W., Liu K. K. (2007) Relative subjective count and assessment of interruptive technologies applied to mobile monitoring of stress. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65: 375–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Poggi I. (2004) Emotions from mind to mind. In: Paiva A., Aylett R., Marsella S. (eds) Proceedings of AAMAS, Workshop on Empathic agents. USA, New York

    Google Scholar 

  45. Prendinger H., Ishizuka M. (2005) The empathic companion: A character-based interface that addresses users’ affective states. International Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence 19: 285–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Prendinger H., Mori J., Ishizuka M. (2005) Using human physiology to evaluate subtle expressivity of a virtual quizmaster in a mathematical game. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 62: 231–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Rao, A. S., & Georgeff, M. P. (1991). Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In: Proceedings of the international conference on Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

  48. Reilly, S. (1996). Believable social and emotional agents. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University.

  49. Rodrigues, S. H., Mascarenhas, S. H., Dias, J., & Paiva, A. (2009). I can feel it too!: Emergent empathic reactions between synthetic characters. In International conference on Affective computing and intelligent interaction (ACII), pp. 664–670.

  50. Roseman I.J. (2001) A model of appraisal in the emotion system. In: Scherer K., Schorr A., Johnstone T. (eds) Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 68–91

    Google Scholar 

  51. Sadek, D. (1991). Attitudes mentales et interaction rationnelle: vers une théorie formelle de la communication. PhD thesis, Université Rennes I.

  52. Sadek, D. (1992). A study in logic of intention. In Proceeding of the 3rd international conference on Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR’92).

  53. Scherer K. (1988) Criteria for emotion-antecedent appraisal: A review. In: Hamilton V., Bower G.H., Frijda N.H. (eds) Cognitive perspectives on emotion and motivation. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 89–126

    Google Scholar 

  54. Scherer K. (1998) Analyzing emotion blends. In: Fischer A. (eds) the Proceedings of the conference of the international society for research on emotions. ISRE Publications, Amsterdam, pp 142–148

    Google Scholar 

  55. Scherer K. (2000) Emotion. In: Hewstone M., Stroebe W. (eds) Introduction to social psychology: A European perspective. Oxford Blackwell Publishers, London, pp 151–191

    Google Scholar 

  56. Scherer K. R., Wranik T., Sangsue J., Tran V., Scherer U. (2004) Emotions in everyday life: Probability of occurrence, risk factors, appraisal and reaction patterns. Social Science Information 43(4): 499–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Searle J. R. (1969) Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  58. Steunebrink, B. R., Dastani, M., & Meyer, J. C. (2008). A formal model of emotions: Integrating qualitative and quantitative aspects. In ECAI, pp. 256–260.

  59. Tanguy, E., Bryson, J., & Willis, P. (2005). A dynamic emotion representation model within a facial animation system. Technical report, Department of Computer Science; University of Bath; England.

  60. Thomas F., Johnston O. (1981) The illusion of life: Disney animation. Disney Editions, New York

    Google Scholar 

  61. Turrini P., Meyer J.-J.Ch., Castelfranchi C. (2007) Rational agents that blush. In: Paiva A., Prada R., Picard R.W. (eds) Affective computing and intelligent interaction. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Magalie Ochs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ochs, M., Sadek, D. & Pelachaud, C. A formal model of emotions for an empathic rational dialog agent. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 24, 410–440 (2012).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: