MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W175571555 · doi:10.5555/2349508.2349544

Anger and aggressive behavior in agent simulation

2009· article· en· W175571555 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSummer Computer Simulation Conference · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngerPersonalityAggressionAffect (linguistics)PsychologyFuzzy logicIntelligent decision support systemKnowledge baseComputer scienceSocial psychologyCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotions, especially negative ones, have a significant influence on the human performance and intelligent behavior. Anger also is more likely to affect decision-making and behaving because anger includes most states of effective emotions, such as stress or fear. Besides, personality has a leading role in affecting the states of emotions in specific situations. The purpose of this paper is simulation of the anger emotion and personality in intelligent agents. To do this, the dimensions of personality related to anger are linked to aggression by a fuzzy expert system as a new way of implementing an intelligent emotional agent. The knowledge base of this expert system contains fuzzy rules obtained from a decision tables and facts obtained from ontology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it