MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946547508 · doi:10.65109/wwnk6060

Towards Modeling the Interplay of Personality, Motivation, Emotion, and Mood in Social Agents

2019· article· en· W2946547508 on OpenAlexaff
Maayan Shvo, Jakob Buhmann, Mubbasir Kapadia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodPersonalityCognitive psychologyAffective computingPsychologyCoping (psychology)Affect (linguistics)Computer scienceSocial relationSocial psychologyHuman–computer interactionPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Creating social agents that interact in believable ways is a challenging task. The agent's emotional state must be faithfully modeled and should bear an influence on its behavior. In this paper, we introduce a computational model of affect which incorporates an empirically-based interplay between its various affective components - personality, motivation, emotion, and mood. These affective components as well as the relations between them capture a number of important mechanisms that are observable in human beings (e.g., motivation driven planning, emotional reactions, or coping) and influence the agent's decision making. Further, these mechanisms, reflected in the agent's behavior, are integral to human-human interaction and are therefore likely to contribute to improved human-agent interaction. In a preliminary evaluation of our approach, we demonstrate the impact of the various components in the model and their interaction with one another on the agent's decision making and behavior, by showing that the agent displays disparate behavior with and without the inclusion of specific components in our model.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207