Advertisement

What Issue Should Your Virtual Butler Solve Next?

  • Stefan Rank
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7407)

Abstract

In this chapter, a scenario-based analysis of the guiding vision of a virtual butler is presented. After introducing the concept of scenario-based analysis for comparing agent-based technology design, we use the characterization of the scenario hinted at in the vision document to discuss several technological issues that arise from it. By disregarding non-technical issues, we arrive at problems (or rather challenges) of technology in a wide sense that could be steps in the direction of the virtual butler. The order of presentation of these challenges is based on a subjective estimation of the complexity involved in arriving at the competence required for a virtual butler.

Keywords

Multiagent System Agent Architecture Conversational Agent Behaviour Coordination Embody Conversational Agent 
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.
    Cassell, J.: Embodied Conversational Agents: Representation and Intelligence in User Interface. Special Issue on Intelligent User Interfaces, AI Magazine 22(4), 67–83 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Luck, M., Aylett, R.: Applying Artificial Intelligence to Virtual Reality: Intelligent Virtual Environments. Applied Artificial Intelligence 14(1), 3–32 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rank, S.: Behaviour Coordination for Models of Affective Behaviour. Dissertation, Vienna University of Technology, carried out at the Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence (OFAI) (2009) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rank, S., Petta, P.: Comparability is key to assess affective architectures. In: Trappl, R. (ed.) Cybernetics and Systems 2006, Proceedings of the Eighteenth Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, pp. 643–648 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sloman, A.: AI in a new millennium - obstacles and opportunities. School of Computer Science, University of Birmingham, UK (2005) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sloman, A., Wyatt, J.: COSY scenario template (2006), http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/projects/cosy/scenarios/scenario-template.txt
  7. 7.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability engineering. Academic Press (1993)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cooper, A.: The inmates are running the asylum. SAMS Publishing (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Russell, S., Norvig, P.: Artificial intelligence - a modern approach. Pearson Education Inc., Upper Saddle River (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weiss, G.: Multiagent Systems - A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clark, A.: Being There: Putting Brain, Body and World Together Again. MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, London (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Agre, P.E., Horswill, I.: Lifeworld Analysis. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6, 111–145 (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Minsky, M.: The emotion machine. Simon & Schuster, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Panton, K., Matuszek, C., Lenat, D., Schneider, D., Witbrock, M., Siegel, N., Shepard, B.: Common Sense Reasoning – From Cyc to Intelligent Assistant. In: Cai, Y., Abascal, J. (eds.) Ambient Intelligence in Everyday Life. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3864, pp. 1–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lieberman, H., Liu, H., Singh, P., Barry, B.: Beating common sense into interactive applications. AI Magazine, Winter 2004 25(4), 63–76 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kay, J.: Lifelong Learner Modeling for Lifelong Personalized Pervasive Learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 1(4), 215–228 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rank, S., Petta, P.: Motivating dramatic interactions. In: Canamero, L. (ed.) Agents that Want and Like: Motivational and Emotional Roots of Cognition and Action, AISB Proceedings, pp. 102–107 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang, N., Johnson, W.L., Mayer, R.E., Rizzo, P., Shaw, E., Collins, H.: The politeness effect: Pedagogical agents and learning outcomes. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 66(2), 98–112 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Paiva, A., Dias, J., Sobral, D., Aylett, R., Sobreperez, P., Woods, S., Zoll, C., Hall, L.: Caring for agents and agents that care: building empathic relations with synthetic agents. In: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2004, pp. 194–201 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Skowron, M., Rank, S., Paltoglou, G., Ahn, J., Gobron, S.: No peanuts! Affective Cues for the Virtual Bartender. In: Guesgen, H., McCarthy, P., Murray, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 24th International FLAIRS Conference (FLAIRS-24), Palm Beach, FL, USA. Affective Computing Special Track, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Rank
    • 1
  1. 1.Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence (OFAI)ViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations