Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Utilizing theory of mind for action selection applied in the domain of fighter pilot training

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When developing intelligent agents, approaches that allow the anticipation of other agents is of utmost importance. For humans, this has also been shown to be crucial to establish good interactions. In this paper, a design for an agent that is equipped with theory of mind based reasoning capabilities is presented. The approach moves beyond the state of the art from several angles: first, it allows for the expression of certainties with respect to the predicted states of the other agents. Second, it allows the prediction during a substantial number of time steps in the future, thereby utilizing the theory of mind model multiple times. The approach has been applied to the domain of fighter pilots whereby intelligent opponents are developed to facilitate dedicated training for F16 fighter pilots.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The steepness parameter needs to be divided by the threshold parameter as keeping the steepness at 10 would mean the threshold function is very flat.

  2. 180 degrees is the maximum deviation from an aircraft’s nose.

References

  1. Barringer H, Fisher M, Gabbay D, Owens R, Reynolds M (1996) The imperative future: principles of executable temporal logic. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baron-Cohen S (1995) Mindblindness. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bosse T, Jonker CM, van der Meij L, Sharpanskykh A, Treur J (2009) Specification and verification of dynamics in agent models. Int J Coop Inf Syst 18:167–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bosse T, Jonker CM, van der Meij L, Treur J (2007) A language and environment for analysis of dynamics by simulation. Int J Artif Intell Tools 16:435–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Castelfranchi C (1998) Modelling social action for AI agents. Artif Intell 103:157–182

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Harbers M, Bosch KVD, Meyer JJ (2009) Modeling agent with a theory of mind. In: Baeza-Yates R, Lang J, Mitra S, Parsons S, Pasi G (eds) Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM international joint conference on web intelligence and agent technology. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 217–224

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Hoogendoorn M, Soumokil J (2010) Evaluation of virtual agents attributed with theory of mind in a real time action game. In: van der Hoek W, Kaminka GA, Lesperance Y, Luck M, Send S (eds) Proceedings of the ninth international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, AAMAS 2010, pp 59–66

    Google Scholar 

  8. Laird J (2001) It knows what you’re going to do: adding anticipation to a quakebot. In: Andre E, Sen S, Frasson C, Muller JP (eds) Proceedings of the 5th international joint conference on autonomous agents. ACM Press, New York, pp 385–392

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Parker LE (1992) Adaptive action selection for cooperative agent teams. In: Meyer J-A, Roitblat H, Wilson S (eds) Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 442–450

    Google Scholar 

  10. Veloso M, Stone P, Bowling M (1999) Anticipation as a key for collaboration in a team of agents: a case study in robotic soccer. In: Proceedings of SPIE sensor fusion and decentralized control in robotic systems II, vol 3839

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pynadath DV, Marsella SC (2005) PsychSim: modeling theory of mind with decision theoretic agents. In: Kaelbling LP, Saffiotti A (eds) Proceedings of IJCAI 2005. Professional Book Center, Denver, pp 1181–1186

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bosse T, Memon ZA, Treur J (2007) A two-level BDI-agent model for theory of mind and its use in social manipulation. In: Olivier P, Kray C (eds) Proceedings of the artificial and ambient intelligence conference, AISB’07, mindful environments track. AISB Publ., London, pp 335–342

    Google Scholar 

  13. Laird JE, Newell A, Rosenbloom PA (1987) SOAR: an architecture for general intelligence. Artif Intell 33:1–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sindlar MP, Dastani MM, Meyer JJ (2009) BDI-based development of virtual characters with a theory of mind. In: Ruttkay Z, Kipp M, Nijholt A, Vilhjalmsson HH (eds) Proceedings of IVA 2009. LNAI, vol 5773. Springer, Berlin, pp 34–41

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ingrand FF, Georgeff MP, Rao AS (1992) An architecture for real-time reasoning and system control. IEEE Intell Syst Appl 7(6):34–44

    Google Scholar 

  16. Al GCM, Hoogendoorn M (2011) Moving target search using theory of mind. In: Boissier O et al (eds) Proceedings of the 11th IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on intelligent agent technology, IAT’11. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos

    Google Scholar 

  17. Forgy CL (1982) Rete: a fast algorithm for the many pattern/many object pattern match problem. Artif Intell 19:17–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Both F, Hoogendoorn M, van der Mee A, Treur J, de Vos M (2012) An intelligent agent model with awareness of workflow progress. J Appl Intell 36:498–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Malatesta L, Raouzaiou A, Karpouzis K, Kollias S (2009) Towards modeling embodied conversational agent character profiles using appraisal theory predictions in expression synthesis. J Appl Intell 30:58–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lai R, Menq K, Lin W, Yu TJ (2010) Learning opponent’s beliefs via fuzzy constraint-directed approach to make effective agent negotiation. J Appl Intell 33:232–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Mark Hoogendoorn

  2. Training, Simulation, and Operator Performance, National Aerospace Laboratory, Anthony Fokkerweg 2, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Robbert-Jan Merk

Authors
  1. Mark Hoogendoorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robbert-Jan Merk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Hoogendoorn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoogendoorn, M., Merk, RJ. Utilizing theory of mind for action selection applied in the domain of fighter pilot training. Appl Intell 39, 749–760 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-013-0436-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-013-0436-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation