Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:23:40.150Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Curious agents and situated design evaluations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2005

ROB SAUNDERS  and
JOHN S. GERO
ROB SAUNDERS
Affiliation:
Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, School of Architecture, Design Science and Planning, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
JOHN S. GERO
Affiliation:
Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, School of Architecture, Design Science and Planning, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents a possible future direction for agent-based simulation using complex agents that can learn from experience and report their individual evaluations. Adding learning to the agent model permits the simulation of potentially important agent behavior such as curiosity. The agents can then report evaluations of a design that are situated in their individual experience. The paper describes the architecture of curious agents used in the situated evaluation of designs. It then describes an example of the application of such curious agents in the evaluation of the curating of an exhibition in an art gallery.

Keywords

Curious AgentsEmergent DesignSimulationsSituated Design
Type
Research Article
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , May 2004 , pp. 153 - 161
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

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

REFERENCES

Berlyne, D.E. (1960). Conflict, Arousal and Curiosity. New York: McGraw–Hill.CrossRef
Berlyne, D.E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton–Century–Crofts.
Gardenfors, P. (2000). Conceptual Spaces: The Geometry of Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Helbing, D. & Molnár, P. (1995). Social force model for pedestrian dynamics. Physical Review E 51, 4282–4286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helbing, D. & Molnár, P. (1997). Self-organization phenomena in pedestrian crowds. In Self-Organization of Complex Structures: From Individual to Collective Dynamics (Schweitzer, F., Ed.), pp. 569–577. London: Gordon & Breach.
Kohonen, T. (1995). Self-Organizing Maps. Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Reynolds, C.W. (1987). Flocks, herds, and schools: A distributed behavioural model. Computer Graphics 21(4), 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, R. & Gero, J.S. (2001a). Designing for interest and novelty: Motivating design agents. In CAADFutures 2001 (de Vries, B., van Leeuwen, J. & Achten, H., Eds.), pp. 725–738. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Saunders, R. & Gero, J.S. (2001b). Artificial creativity: A synthetic approach to the study of creative behaviour. In Computational and Cognitive Models of Creative Design (Gero, J.S. & Maher, M.L., Eds.), Vol. V, pp. 113–139. Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney, Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition.
Schmidhuber, J. (1991). Curious model-building control systems. Proc. Int. Joint Conf. Neural Networks, Vol. 2, pp. 1458–1463. Singapore: IEEE Press.CrossRef
Schmidhuber, J. (1997). What's interesting? Technical Report No. TR-35-97. Lugano, Switzerland: IDSIA.
Woodcock, S. (1999). Flocking: A simple technique for simulating group behavior. In Game Programming Gems (DeLoura, M., Ed.), pp. 305–318. Hingham: Charles River Media.