Consensual Paintings

  • Paulo Urbano
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3907)


Decentralized coordination can be achieved by the emergence of a consensual choice inside a group of simple agents. Work done on emergence of social laws, and on emergence of a shared lexicon, are known examples of possible benefits of consensus formation in multi-agent systems. We think that in the artificial artistic realm, the agreement on some individual choices (attributes, behaviour, etc) can be important for the emergence of interesting patterns. We describe here an effective decentralized mechanism of consensus formation and how we can achieve a random evolution of decentralized consensual choices. Our goal is designing swarm art, exploring the landscape of forms. Non coordinated social behaviour can be unfruitful for the goal of collective artistic creation. On the other hand, full agreement along time generally leads towards too much homogeneity in a collective pattern. This way, the random succession of collective agreements can lead to the emergence of random patterns, somewhere between order and chaos. We show several application of this transition between consensual choices in a group of micro-painters that create random artistic patterns.


Artistic World Random Evolution Consensus Formation Conflict Interaction Convention Emergence 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Moura, L.: Swarm Paintings. Architopia: Art, Architecture, Science. In: Maubant, (ed.): Institut d’Art Contemporaine (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grassé, P.-P.: Termitologia, Tome II. Fondation des Sociétés. Construction. Masson, Paris (1984) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aupetit, S., Bordeau, V., Monmarché, N.: Interactive Evolution of Ant Paintings. In: CEC 2003 - Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 1376–1382. IEEE Press, Canberra (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Urbano, P.: Playing in the pheromone playground: Experiences in swarm painting. In: Rothlauf, F., Branke, J., Cagnoni, S., Corne, D.W., Drechsler, R., Jin, Y., Machado, P., Marchiori, E., Romero, J., Smith, G.D., Squillero, G. (eds.) EvoWorkshops 2005. LNCS, vol. 3449, pp. 527–532. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaplan, F.: Lemergence d’un lexique dans une population d’agents autonomes. PhD thesis, LIP6 Universit’e Paris VI (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shoham, Y., Tennenholtz, M.: Emergent conventions in multi-agents systems: initial experiments results and observations. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge and Reasoning, pp. 225–231 (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Resnick, M.: Turtles, Termites and Traffic Jams: explorations in massively parallel microworlds. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Urbano, P.: Jogos Descentralizados de Consenso ou de Consenso em Consenso. PhD Thesis, Universidade de Lisboa (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paulo Urbano
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculdade de Ciências de Lisboa 

Personalised recommendations