24
A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 48-69, 2008 2008311760 최최최

A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion

Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis

Cognitive Systems Research

vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 48-69, 2008

2008311760 최봉환

Page 2: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

PEACTIDM

2 /24

Page 3: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Soar : cognitive architecture

• Cognitive architecture– Task-independent structure and subsystems

• Soar– For Cognitive modeling– For Real-world application

of knowledge-rich intelligent systems

– Long-term Memories• Procedural, semantic, episodic• Associative learning mechanisms

(working Memory)

3 /24

Page 4: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

PEACTIDM in Soar

Motorhandled by simulation of the environment

Decode

send selected action to output system

Comprehend

implemented as a set of comprehend operators

Attend

implemented as an Attend operator by PEACTIDM ( only allow a stimuli at a time )

Encoding

matching rules in procedural memory generate domain-independent augmenta-tions

Perceive

reception of raw sensory inputs

Tasking

Create the goal in Short-term Memory

4 /24

Page 5: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

appraisal theories

• What can emotion provide?– PEACTIDM and cognitive architectures

• Describe : processes, constraints and timescale • Do not describe : the specific knowledge structures

– Much of the information required by PEACTIDM• Structure of Encode generate, what information does Attend, informa-

tion by Comprehend generate, information of Intend use to generate a response

Emotion = the PEACTIDM operations

• Appraisal theories– Emotions result from the evaluation of the relations ship

between goals and situations [Roseman & Smith, 2001]• Ref) Parkinson (2009), Marsella and Gratch (2009), and Reisenzein

(2009).

– Fit naturally into our immediate choice response task• Complex cognition = with complex emotion [Smith & Lazarus, 1990]

– Discrepancy from Expectation 전구를 끄려고 버튼을 눌렀지만 안 꺼진 경우

• Mismatch between the actual state and the expected state• Conflicts with the Outcome Probability

Feel Surprise

Emotion modeling : Introduce

5 /24

Page 6: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Scherer’s appraisal theory ( 2001)

• Features– 16 appraisal dimensions

• 4 groups : relevance, implication, coping potential, normative signifi-cance

– A continuous space of emotion• Provides a mapping from appraisal values to emotion labels• Labels modal emotions

– Appraisal are not generated simultaneously– Process model (abstract level)

Emotion modeling : in detail

6 /24

Page 7: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Integration : Theory

• How PEACTIDM + Scherer's appraisal theory

7 /24

Page 8: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Integration : Implementation(1)

• Appraisal values

• Computing the active appraisal frame– Pre-attentive appraisal frames[Gratch and Marsella,

2004]• Before Attend : one frame for each stimulus the agent perceives

– Attend = select a stimulus– Active frame : selected stimulus associated appraisal

frame

8 /24

Page 9: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Integration : Implementation(2)

• Sequences and time courses of appraisals– The appraisals are generated sequentially [Scherer,

2001]– The model implies avoid error and low efficiency

• Partially ordered sequences of appraisals• Varying time courses for the generation of those appraisals

• Determining the current emotion– Appraisal Detector [Smith & Kirby, 2001]

• processes the active frame to determine the current emotion

– Supports one active appraisal frame at a time(=only one emotion)

– Categorical theories of emotion : fixed number of possi-ble feelings

• A unique appraisal frame a unique experience• segmenting the space of appraisal frames Categorical, linguistic la-

bels

– Actual representation • active appraisal frame: Suddenness = 1.0, Goal Relevance= 1.0, Out-

come Probability = 1.0, Conduciveness = 1.0.9 /24

Page 10: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Integration : Implementation(3)

• Calculating intensity– Summarizes the importance of the emotion– Intensity function [Marinier and Laird, 2007]

• Limited ranges : single value, should map to [0, 1]• No dominant appraisal : multiple values, should dominate the inten-

sity function, generally multiplication is used as combine method [Gratch and Marsella, 2004]

• Realization principle : expected stimuli should be less intense thant unexpected stimuli [Neal Reilly, 2006]

• OP : Outcome Probability, DE : Discrepancy from Expectation, S : Sud-dennesssUP : Unpredictability, IP : Intrinsic Pleasantness, GR : Goal Relevance, Cond : Conduciveness, Ctrl : Control, P : Power, num_dims : # of di-mension

10 /24

Page 11: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Integration : Implementation(4)

• Modeling the task

• The revised task

11 /24

Page 12: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : Eaters (Pacman) domain (1)

• Eaters Domain : an arbitrary # of cycle is required• New topic

– How previous emotions affect new emotions– The role of Tasking when the ongoing task may be viewed

as different subtasks

12 /24

Page 13: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : PEACTIDM (1)

• Perception & Encoding– Perception

• Per direction• by Symbolic data

– Encoding• 4 Cardinal direction : north/south/west/east• Each direction has passable, distance to goal• The distance to goal

– estimated on Manhattan distance

13 /24

Page 14: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : PEACTIDM (2)

• Attending– The selection of which stimulus : weighted random choice

• Weight : the values of the appraisals

14 /24

Page 15: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : PEACTIDM (3)

• Comprehension– Additional appraisal values to the active frame

• Conduciveness : if direction is passable and on the path to the goal then high

• Control and Power : if direction is passable then high

– Specific stimuli determine• "natural" Causal Agent• "chance" Causal Motive• "back out" : should not proceed, solve with heuristic method

( dynamic difference reduction ; Newell, Shaw, and Simon, 1960)

– Comprehension operators• Complete : when can act as stimuli• Ignore : control return to attend

• Tasking (in generelly Managing goals)– Abstracted goal : ex) "go to work"

• cannot be acted upon directly• must be broken down into more concrete compoonents

– Concrete goal : ex) "take a step"• can be acted upon directly

15 /24

Page 16: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : PEACTIDM (4)

• Intending– Intend function : implemented as a Soar operator– If the agent is currently one step away from the goal,

then it creates a goal achievement prediction. – Along with the prediction, the agent also generates an

Outcome Probability appraisal.

• Decode and motor– Soar’s standard method of communicating

16 /24

Page 17: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : Emotion (1)

• Over a long period of time in this task how do emotions affect each other over time?

• Emotion– Many theories : Hudlicka, 2004, Gratch & Marsella, 2004,

Damasio, 1994; Damasio, 2003, ... • Feelings = perception of our emotions• Emotion : short-lived• Mood : tend to longer

– Modeling• Feeling : intensity of appraisal frame• Emotion : feeling + feeling intensity• Mood : "moves" toward the emotion

each time step

17 /24

Page 18: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : Emotion (2)

18 /24

Page 19: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Example : The Influence of Emo-tion, mood and feeling upon behav-ior

• Feeling– Additional knowledge to the state representation

• Current = emotion, Past = mood

– Guide control influence behavior• [Forgas, 1999], [Gross & John, 2003]

– Integration with action tendencies [Frijda et al., 1989]

included to demonstrate the possibility of feelings influ-encing behavior and focusing on one aspect of coping

• coping by giving up on goals

• Giving up : a kind of Tasking– Emotional feedback can detect is not making progress toward the goal– Subtask can give up if agents current feeling of Con-

duciveness is negative• Mood : motivation to go

19 /24

Page 20: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Evaluation

20 /24

Page 21: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Evaluation Result

21 /24

Page 22: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Related Work

• EMA [Gratch and Marsella, 2004]– Emotion and Adaptation– A computational model of a simple appraisal theory im-

plemented in Soar 7• MAMID [Hudlicka, 2004]

– Building emotions into a cognitive architecture• OCC/Em [Ortony et al, 1988]

– OCC model– OCC only briefly touches on mood, but leaves it unspeci-

fied• Kismet [Breazeal, 2003]

– social robot

22 /24

Page 23: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

Summary

• (1) Appraisals are a functionally required part of cognitive processing; they cannot be replaced by some other emotion generation theory.

• (2) Appraisals provide a task-independent language for con-trol knowledge, although their values can be determined by task-dependent knowledge. Emotion and mood, by virtue of being derived from appraisals, abstract summaries of the current and past states, respectively. Feeling, then, aug-ments the current state representation with knowledge that combines the emotion and mood representations and can in-fluence control.

• (3) The integration of appraisal and PEACTIDM implies a partial ordering of appraisal generation.

• (4) This partial ordering specifies a time course of appraisal generation, which leads to time courses for emotion, mood and feeling.

• (5) Emotion intensity is largely determined by expectations and consequences for the agent; thus, even seemingly mundane tasks can be emotional under the right circum-stances.

• (6) In general, appraisals may require an arbitrary amount of inference to be generated

23 /24

Page 24: A computational unification of cognitive behavior and emotion Robert P. Marinier III, John E. Laird, Richard L. Lewis Cognitive Systems Research vol. 10,

용어

• CSP - Constraint Satisfaction ProblemEBG - Explana-tion-Based Generalisation

• EBL - Explanation-Based Learning• GOMS - Goals, Operators, Methods, and Selection rules

• HISoar - Highly Interactive Soar• ILP - Inductive Logic Programming• NNPSCM - New New Problem Space Computational Model

• NTD - NASA Test Director• PEACTIDM - Perceive, Encode, Attend, Comprehend, Task, Intend, Decode, Move

• SCA - Symbolic Concept Acquisition

24 /24