Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-8r4lv Total loading time: 0.177 Render date: 2021-07-28T02:26:19.685Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Environmental effects on simulated emotional and moody agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2017

Joe Collenette
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK e-mail: j.m.collenette@liverpool.ac.uk
Katie Atkinson
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK e-mail: j.m.collenette@liverpool.ac.uk
Daan Bloembergen
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK e-mail: j.m.collenette@liverpool.ac.uk
Karl Tuyls
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK e-mail: j.m.collenette@liverpool.ac.uk
Corresponding

Abstract

Psychological models have been used to simulate emotions within agents as part of the decision-making process. The body of this work has focussed on applying the process of decision making using emotions to social dilemmas, notably the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Previous work has focussed on agents which do not move around, with an initial analysis on how mobility and the environment can affect the decisions chosen. Additionally simulated mood has been introduced to the decision-making process. Exploring simulated emotions and mood to inform the decision-making process in multi-agent systems allows us to explore in further detail how outside influences can have an effect on different strategies. We expand and clarify aspects of how agents are affected by environmental differences. We show how emotional characters settle on an outcome without deviation by providing a formal proof. We validate how the addition of mood increases cooperation, while also showing how small groups achieve this quicker than large groups. Once pure defectors are added, to test the resilience of the cooperation achieved, we see that while agents with a low starting mood achieve a payoff closest to the pure defectors, they are reduced in numbers the most by the pure defectors.

Type
Adaptive and Learning Agents
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

André, E., Klesen, M., Gebhard, P., Allen, S. & Rist, T. 2000. Integrating models of personality and emotions into lifelike characters. In Affective Interactions, A. Paiva (ed.), LNCS 1814, 150165. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, R. & Hamilton, W. D. 1981. The evolution of cooperation. Science 211(4489), 13901396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloembergen, D., Ranjbar-Sahraei, B., Bou Ammar, H., Tuyls, K. & Weiss, G. 2014. Influencing social networks: an optimal control study. In Proceedings of ECAI’14, 105–110.Google Scholar
Collenette, J., Atkinson, K., Bloembergen, D. & Tuyls, K. 2016a. Modelling mood in co-operative emotional agents. In Proceedings of DARS'16.Google Scholar
Collenette, J., Atkinson, K., Bloembergen, D. & Tuyls, K. 2016b. Mobility effects on the evolution of co-operation in emotional robotic agents. In Proceedings of ALA Workshop.Google Scholar
Collenette, J., Atkinson, K., Bloembergen, D. & Tuyls, K. 2016c. The effect of mobility and emotion on interactions in multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of STAIRS’16.Google Scholar
Fehr, E. & Schmidt, K. M. 1999. A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114(3), 817–868.Google Scholar
Gerkey, B., Vaughan, R. T. & Howard, A. 2003. The player/stage project: tools for multi-robot and distributed sensor systems. In Proceedings of ICAR’03, 317–323.Google Scholar
Gibson, E. L. 2006. Emotional influences on food choice: sensory, physiological and psychological pathways. Physiology & Behavior 89(1), 5361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gintis, H. 2000. Game Theory Evolving: A Problem-Centered Introduction to Modeling Strategic Behavior. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gray, E. K., Watson, D., Payne, R. & Cooper, C. 2001. Emotion, mood, and temperament: similarities, differences, and a synthesis. In Emotions at Work: Theory, Research and Applications for Management, Chapter 2, Payne, R. L., & Cooper, C. L. (eds). Wiley and Sons: Chichester, UK, 2143.Google Scholar
Haley, W. E. & Strickland, B. R. 1986. Interpersonal betrayal and cooperation: effects on self-evaluation in depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50(2), 386391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hertel, G., Neuhof, J., Theuer, T. & Kerr, N. L. 2000. Mood effects on cooperation in small groups: Does positive mood simply lead to more cooperation? Cognition & Emotion 14(4), 441472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilbe, C., Traulsen, A. & Sigmund, K. 2015. Partners or rivals? Strategies for the iterated prisoner’s dilemma. Games and Economic Behavior 92, 4152.Google Scholar
Hofmann, L.-M., Chakraborty, N. & Sycara, K. 2011. The evolution of cooperation in self-interested agent societies: a critical study. In Proceedings of AAMAS, 685–692.Google Scholar
Keltner, D. & Gross, J. J. 1999. Functional accounts of emotions. Cognition & Emotion 13(5), 467480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leahy, R. L. 2005. Clinical implications in the treatment of mania: reducing risk behavior in manic patients. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice 12(1), 8998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levenson, R. W. 1994. Human emotion: a functional view. The Nature of Emotion: Fundamental Questions 1, 123126.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Kelly, M., Atkinson, K. & Bench-Capon, T. 2012a. Developing co-operation through simulated emotional behaviour. In 13th International Workshop on Multi-Agent Based Simulation.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Kelly, M., Atkinson, K. & Bench-Capon, T. 2012b. Emotion as an enabler of co-operation. In ICAART (2), 164–169.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Kelly, M., Atkinson, K. & Bench-Capon, T. 2014. Fostering co-operative behaviour through social intervention. In Proceedings of SIMULTECH’14, 578–585. IEEE.Google Scholar
Lount, R. B. J. 2010. The impact of positive mood on trust in interpersonal and intergroup interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98(3), 420433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortony, A., Clore, G. L. & Collins, A. 1990. The Cognitive Structure of Emotions. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Popescu, A., Broekens, J. & van Someren, M. 2014. Gamygdala: an emotion engine for games. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 5(1), 3244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, J., Peterson, B. & Russell, J. 2005. The circumplex model of affect: an integrative approach to affective neuroscience, cognitive development, and psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology 17(3), 715734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ranjbar-Sahraei, B., Bou Ammar, H., Bloembergen, D., Tuyls, K. & Weiss, G. 2014a. Evolution of cooperation in arbitrary complex networks. In Proceedings of AAMAS’14, 677–684.Google Scholar
Ranjbar-Sahraei, B., Groothuis, I. M., Tuyls, K. & Weiss, G. 2014b. Valuation of cooperation and defection in small-world networks: a behavioral robotic approach. In Proceedings of BNAIC 2014.Google Scholar
Santos, F. C., Santos, M. D. & Pacheco, J. M. 2008. Social diversity promotes the emergence of cooperation in public goods games. Nature 454(7201), 213216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwarz, N. 2000. Emotion, cognition, and decision making. Cognition and Emotion 14(4), 433440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steunebrink, B. R., Dastani, M., Meyer, J.-J. C. 2007. A logic of emotions for intelligent agents. Proceedings of AAAI’07 22, 142.Google Scholar
Van Veelen, M., Garca, J., Rand, D. G. & Nowak, M. A. 2012. Direct reciprocity in structured populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109(25), 99299934.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Environmental effects on simulated emotional and moody agents
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Environmental effects on simulated emotional and moody agents
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Environmental effects on simulated emotional and moody agents
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *