Gamasutra - Feature - "Anticipatory AI and Compelling Characters"
It's free to join Gamasutra!|Have a question? Want to know who runs this site? Here you go.|Targeting the game development market with your product or service? Get info on advertising here.||For altering your contact information or changing email subscription preferences.
Registered members can log in here.Back to the home page.

Search articles, jobs, buyers guide, and more.

By Bruce Blumberg
[Author's Bio]

Gamasutra
February 16, 2006

Introduction

Anticipation: Expected Expectation

Printer Friendly Version
   

Change Login/Pwd
Post A Job
Post A Project
Post Resume
Post An Event
Post A Contractor
Post A Product
Write An Article
Get In Art Gallery
Submit News

 


 


Latest Letters to the Editor:
Perpetual Layoffs by Alexander Brandon [09.21.2007]

Casual friendliness in MMO's by Colby Poulson [09.20.2007]

Scrum deals and 'What is Scrum?' by Tom Plunket [08.29.2007]


[Submit Letter]

[View All...]
  



Upcoming Events:
Visual Futurist: The Art & Life of Syd Mead
Vancouver, BC, Canada
05.14.08

Nordic Game 2008
Malmö, Sweden
05.14.08

CoGames 2008: The 1st International Workshop on Collaborative Games
Irvine, United States
05.19.08

Vancouver International Games Summit
Vancouver, Canada
05.21.08

Game Institute Challenge #7
, United States
05.30.08

[Submit Event]
[View All...]

 


[Enter Forums...]

Note: Discussion forums for Gamasutra are hosted by the IGDA, which is free to join.
 


Features

Anticipatory AI and Compelling Characters

Anticipation: Expected Expectations

Disney animators conceptualize every action as telling a story. The anticipatory action prepares the audience for what the character is about to do. It together with the body of the action communicates not only what the character is about to do and then do, but also the character's expectation of how the action is going to play out. The end of the action, the so-called follow-through, communicates how the character feels about the outcome: was it what was expected or not, and if not, was it better or worse than expected. The operative word here is “expectation.”

The action from beginning to end conveys the character's expectation of how the world works in general and the effect of their actions upon that world in specific. Having expectations, acting on them, and reacting to the mismatch between expectations and outcomes are the hallmarks of sentient behavior. Thus, if we want our characters to appear to be sentient, expectations must inform their behavioral choices and the manner in which those behavioral choices are performed so as to make the character's expectations manifest.

Expectations are nothing more than predictions about some aspect of the future state of the world. In some cases, the prediction is contingent on the character performing some action, e.g., if I sit and look cute, my owner will give me a piece of steak. In other cases, the character has no control over the contingency, e.g., every time I go by that mean dog, he barks and lunges, and I get scared. Another, less dire prediction might reflect important contingencies between events in the world, e.g., dad going to the closet and getting the leash means a walk is coming. As each of the previous examples illustrate, expectations often reflect lessons learned from past experience.

Having and communicating expectations convey a sense of sentience for at least three reasons. First, expectations allow characters to respond to other events and characters on the basis of what they expect will happen, and not simply to just what has happened. This ability to act based on some expectation of the future, especially one that is grounded in past experience, is taken by most people as a hallmark of what it means to be aware. Second, when an expectation is accompanied by a visible emotional response, it signals that the character cares what happens to it, and this in turn makes it much more likely that the audience will care too. Third, expectations are the basis for learning from experience since an expectation can be measured against an actual outcome and modified accordingly. Once again, learning from experience is expected from a sentient and aware being.


Dobie could be trained using traditional real-world dog training techniques. Dobie would learn the expected outcome of his actions based on experience, and had a simple emotional system that reflected those expectations and experiences.

Much of our work at the Media Lab investigated various aspects of expectations. Chris Kline set the stage by exploring how and why expectations could, and should, be incorporated into a behavior-based character model. In particular, he investigated the problem of expectation generation and how to recognize, and respond to, expectation violations. Damian Isla's impressive work on expectations addressed the problem of forming and validating expectations about the likely location of objects that have been observed in the past, but aren't currently visible. These expectations reflect the uncertainty associated with the passage of time given the last observed behavior of the object. His system utilizes synthetic vision as its way to perceive the world and update its expectations.

Thus, when his creatures glance from side to side in an inquisitive manner it is because they are inquisitive and are glancing about to update their internal model of the world. The resulting motion is very compelling. Moreover, Isla shows how confusion, surprise and frustration arise naturally out of the model. Rob Burke implemented a very elegant system based on expectations in which his characters could learn about causality and adapt to changes in the world, all the while going about their business. Finally, in the group's Dobie work, in which an animated dog can be trained like a real dog, expectations were used as the basis for a simple emotion system. For example, Dobie's affect conveys his expectation based on past experience of whether the outcome will be good or bad the moment he decides to perform an action, and he responds appropriately to a mismatch between an expected and actual outcome.

Anticipation: Telegraphing Changes in State

It is very rare that even a sudden change in an animal's mood isn't preceded by observable cues that warn of the impending change. Indeed, a cat that is on its back and purring in response to having its tummy rubbed, may stiffly flick its tail once or twice before it sinks its claws and teeth into the unsuspecting hand. Here, the gross behavior of the animal is consistent with being in one motivational context, but an anticipatory behavior is signaling imminent change to a new motivational context. It also tells the observer that the cat has a representation of the future, and the observer's hand is very much part of that future. The alert observer may be caught by surprise that the animal is moving into this new context, but the change seems motivated when preceded by some sign that it is coming.

The absence of anticipatory behaviors that predict significant changes in motivational state (and hence behavior) is a consistent weakness of many AI models of behavior. As a result, changes from one motivational state to the next often appear startling and ultimately inexplicable. One source of the problem is that by modeling motivational contexts as finite states, such a system only knows how to display that state when the system is in that particular state.

Indeed, the system may be architected in such a way that it is impossible for it to know that it is about to switch contexts. Another source of the problem is that most systems are focused on reacting to what has happened rather than on anticipating what will happen and communicating to the audience how the character feels about that expectation. Finally, in some systems the latency associated with responding to a startling event is so long that it seems unbelievable.

Indeed, telegraphing changes in state is inextricably linked to incorporating expectations into the perceptual and behavioral architecture, and on getting the anticipatory behaviors right, from perception to behavioral cues, and then staging it all so that the audience's eye is directed to the cues the character is giving with respect to what it is about to do and how it feels about it.

Conclusion

If we are to create the kind of compelling and emotional characters upon which the next generation of computer games will be based, the characters must seem as if they possess a rich inner life that is reflected in all they do, how they do it and how they feel about it. In this article, we have suggested that an important step toward achieving this goal will be to get the anticipatory behaviors right. That is, those behaviors that signal what the character is about to do and how they feel about it. While often subtle, they are the basis for our belief that we are observing a sentient being, aware of its world and its place in that world. In the end, it's about getting the little things right.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the former members of the Synthetic Characters Group at the Media Lab since many of the ideas in this article arose out of their insight and work. I would also like to thank John Wheeler of Blue Fang Games for his many contributions to this article. Thanks as well to the other members of the Synthetic Animals Team at Blue Fang Games.

References

Blumberg, B., M. Downie, et al. (2002). "Integrated Learning for Interactive Synthetic Characters." Transactions on Graphics 21, 3(Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 2002).

Burke, R. (2004). Great Expectations: Predictions in Entertainment Applications. Life-Like Characters: Tools, Affective Functions and Applications. H. Prendinger and M. Ishizuka. Berlin, Springer-Verlag: 477.

Isla, D., R. Burke, et al. (2001). "A Layered Brain Architecture for Synthetic Creatures." Proceedings of The International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Seattle, WA.

Isla, D. and B. Blumberg (2002). "Object Persistence for Synthetic Characters." Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Bologna, Italy.

Kline, C. (1999). Observation-based Expectation Generation and Response for Behavior-based Artificial Creatures. The Media Lab. Cambridge, MA, MIT: 69.

Thomas, F. and O. Johnson (1981). The Illusion of Life: Disney Animation. New York, NY. Hyperion.

_____________________________________________________

[back to] Introduction

 


join | contact us | advertise | write | my profile
news | features | companies | jobs | resumes | education | product guide | projects | store



Copyright © 2005 CMP Media LLC

privacy policy
| terms of service