Advertisement

Increaing Sia Architecture Realism by Modeling and Adapting to Affect and Personality

  • Eva Hudlicka
Part of the Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations book series (MASA, volume 3)

Abstract

The ability to exhibit, recognize and respond to different affective states is a key aspect of social interaction. To enhance their believability and realism, socially intelligent agent architectures must be capable of modeling and generating behavior variations due to distinct affective states on the one hand, and to recognize and adapt to such variations in the human user / collaborator on the other. This chapter describes an adaptive user interface system capable of recognizing and adapting to the user’s affective and belief state: the Affect and Belief Adaptive Interface System (ABAIS). ABAIS architecture implements a four-phase adaptive methodology and provides a generic adaptive framework for exploring a variety of user affect assessment methods and GUI adaptation strategies. An ABAIS prototype was implemented and demonstrated in the context of an Air Force combat task, using a knowledge-based approach to assess and adapt to the pilot’s anxiety level.

Keywords

Affective State Compensatory Strategy Belief State Diagnostic Task Impact Prediction 
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]
    J.T. Cacioppo, D.J. Klein, G.G. Bernston, and E. Hatfield. The Psychophysiology of Emotion. In M. Lewis and J. Haviland, editors, Handbook of Emotions. Guilford Press, New York, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    L.D. Cañamero. Issues in the Design of Emotional Agents. In Emotional and Intelligent: The Tangled Knot of Cognition. Papers from the 1998 AAAI Fall Symposium. TR FS-98-03, pages 49–54. AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, 1998.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    P.T. Costa and R.R. McCrae. Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13: 653–665, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    E. Hudlicka and J. Billingsley. ABAIS: Affect and Belief Adaptive Interface System. Report AFRL-HE-WP-TR-1999-0169. WPAFB, OH: US AFRL, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    E. Hudlicka and J. Billingsley. Representing Behavior Moderators in Military Human Performance Models. In Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation, pages 423–433. Orlando, FL, May 1999.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    E. Hudlicka. Cognitive Affective Personality Task Analysis. Technical Report 0104, Psychometrix Associates, Inc., Blacksburg, VA, 2001.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J.E. LeDoux. Cognitive-Emotional Interactions in the Brain. Cognition and Emotion, 3(4): 267–289, 1989.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    G. Matthews and I.J. Deary. Personality Traits. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J.M.G. Williams, F.N. Watts, C. MacLeod, and A. Mathews. Cognitive Psychology and Emotional Disorders. John Wiley, New York, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eva Hudlicka

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations