Advertisement

Agent-based simulation of reactive, pro-active and social animal behaviour

  • Catholijn M. Jonker
  • Jan Treur
3 Formal Tools Multi-Agent Systems
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1415)

Abstract

In this paper it is shown how animal behaviour can be simulated in an agent-based manner. Different models are shown for different types of behaviour, varying from purely reactive behaviour to pro-active and social behaviour. The compositional development method for multi-agent systems DESIRE and its software environment supports the conceptual and detailed design, and execution of these models. Experiments reported in the literature on animal behaviour have been simulated for a number of agent models.

Keywords

Animal Behaviour Reactive Behaviour Agent Information Intentional Stance World Information 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agre, P.E., and D. Chapman, Pengi: an Implementation of a Theory of Activity. In: Proceedings of the sixth National Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-87), Morgan Kaufmann, 1987, pp. 268–272.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, C., and Bekoff, M., Species of Mind: the philosophy and biology of cognitive ethology. MIT Press, 1997Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brazier, F.M.T., F. Cornelissen, R. Gustavsson, C.M. Jonker, O. Lindeberg, B. Polak, J. Treur, Agents Negotiating for Load Balancing of Electricity Use. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, ICMAS-98, IEEE Society Press, 1998Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brazier, F.M.T., Dunin-Keplicz, B., Jennings, N.R. and Treur, J., Formal specification of Multi-Agent Systems: a real-world case. In: V. Lesser (Ed.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, ICMAS 95, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995, pp. 25–32. Extended version in: International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, M. Huhns, M. Singh, (Eds.), special issue on Formal Methods in Cooperative Information Systems: Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 6, 1997, pp. 67–94.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brazier, F.M.T., Eck, P.A.T. van, and Treur, J. Modelling a society of simple agents: from conceptual specification to experimentation. In: Conte, R., Hegselmann, R. and Terna, P. (eds.), Simulating Social Phenomena, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Simulation and Social Sciences, ICCS&SS'97, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol. 456, Springer Verlag, 1997, pp. 103–107.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brazier, F.M.T., C.M. Jonker, F.J.Jiingen, J. Treur, Distributed Scheduling to Support a Call Centre: a Co-operative Multi-Agent Approach. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Practical Applications of Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, PAAM-98, The Practical Application Company Ltd, 1998Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brazier, F.M.T., Jonker, C.M., Treur, J., Formalisation of a cooperation model based on joint intentions. In: J.P. Miiller, M.J. Wooldridge, N.R. Jennings (eds.), Intelligent Agents III (Proc. of the Third International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures and Languages, ATAL'96), Lecture Notes in AI, volume 1193, Springer Verlag, 1997, pp. 141–155.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brooks, R.A., A robust layered control system for a mobile robot. In: IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation, Vol. RA-2 (1), 1986, pp. 14–23.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cornelissen, F., Jonker, C.M., Treur, J., Compositional verification of knowledge-based systems: a case study in diagnostic reasoning. In: E. Plaza, R. Benjamins (eds.), Knowledge Acquisition, Modelling and Management, Proceedings of the 10th EKAW'97, Lecture Notes in Al, vol. 1319, Springer Verlag, 1997, pp. 65–80.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dennett, D.C., The Intentional Stance. MIT Press, Cambridge, 1987.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dijkstra, E.W., A discipline of programming. Prentice Hall, 1976.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gibson, J.J., The concept of the stimulus in psychology. In: American Psychology 15, 1960, pp. 694–703.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hunter, W.S., The delayed reaction in animals. Behavioral Monographs, 2, 1912, pp. 1–85Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jonker, C.M., Trent, J., Compositional Verification of Multi-Agent Systems: a Formal Analysis of Pro-activeness and Reactiveness. In: W.P. de Roever, A. Pnueli et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Workshop on Compositionality, COMPOS'97, Springer Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jonker, C.M., J. Trent, A Generic Architecture for Broker Agents. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Practical Applications of Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, PAAM-98, The Practical Application Company Ltd, 1998Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaelbling, L.P., An archictecture for intelligent reactive systems. In: Allen, J., and J. Hendler, and A. Tate (eds.), Readings in Planning, Morgan Kaufmann, 1990, pp. 713–728.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maes, P. (ed.), Designing Autonomous Agents: Theory and Practice from Biology to Engineering and Back. MIT / Elsevier, 1990.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morgan, C.L., An introduction to comparative psychology. London: Scott, 1894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mülller, J. P., The design of intelligent agents: a layered approach. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1177, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pavlov, I.P., Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford, 1927.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Skinner, B.F., The generic nature of the concepts of stimulus and response. Journal of gen. Psychology 12, 1935, pp. 40–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tinklepaugh, O.L., Multiple delayed reaction with chimpanzees and monkeys. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 13, 1932, pp. 207–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vauclair, J., Animal Cognition Harvard Univerity Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1996.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Watson, J.P., Psychology from the standpoint of a behaviourist. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wooldridge, M.J., and N.R. Jennings, Intelligent Agents: Theory and practice. In: Knowledge Engineering Review, 10(2), 1995, pp. 115–152.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catholijn M. Jonker
    • 1
  • Jan Treur
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Artificial Intelligence GroupVrije Universiteit AmsterdamHV AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations