Research into Intelligent Behavior Decision Making of Robots

1994 ◽  
pp. 253-293
Author(s):  
Yoichiro Maeda
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Intelligent Behavior

scholarly journals ARCog: An Aerial Robotics Cognitive Architecture

Robotica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milena F. Pinto ◽  
Leonardo M. Honório ◽  
Andre L. M. Marcato ◽  
Mario A. R. Dantas ◽  
Aurelio G. Melo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Architecture ◽  
Aerial Robotics ◽  
Sensors And Actuators ◽  
Cognitive Approach ◽  
Vehicle Architecture ◽  
Level Data ◽  
Intelligent Behavior ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
High Level

SUMMARY Efficient algorithm integration is a key issue in aerial robotics. However, only a few integration solutions rely on a cognitive approach. Cognitive approaches break down complex problems into independent units that may deal with progressively lower-level data interfaces, all the way down to sensors and actuators. A cognitive architecture defines information flow among units to produce emergent intelligent behavior. Despite the improvements in autonomous decision-making, several key issues remain open. One of these issues is the selection, coordination, and decision-making related to the several specialized tasks required for fulfilling mission objectives. This work addresses decision-making for the cognitive unmanned-aerial-vehicle architecture coined as ARCog. The proposed architecture lays the groundwork for the development of a software platform aligned with the requirements of the state-of-the-art technology in the field. The system is designed to provide high-level decision-making. Experiments prove that ARCog works correctly in its target scenario.

scholarly journals Simple Physical Interactions Yield Social Self-Organization in Honeybees

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Szopek ◽  
Valerin Stokanic ◽  
Gerald Radspieler ◽  
Thomas Schmickl
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Complex Adaptive Systems ◽  
Adaptive Systems ◽  
Social Factor ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Brood Production ◽  
Complex Adaptive ◽  
Intelligent Behavior ◽  
Behavioral Mechanisms

Social insect colonies show all characteristics of complex adaptive systems (CAS). Their complex behavioral patterns arise from social interactions that are based on the individuals’ reactions to and interactions with environmental stimuli. We study here how social and environmental factors modulate and bias the collective thermotaxis of young honeybees. Therefore, we record their collective decision-making in a series of laboratory experiments and derived a mathematical model of the collective decision-making in young bees from our empirical observations. This model uses only one free parameter that combines the ultimate effects of several aspects of the microscopic individual behavioral mechanisms, such as motion behavior, sensory range, or contact detection, into one single coefficient. We call this coefficient the “social factor.” Our model is capable of capturing the observed aggregation patterns from our empiric experiments with static environments and of predicting the emergent swarm-intelligent behavior of the system in dynamic environments. Besides the fundamental research aspect in studying CAS, our model enables us to predict the effects of a physical stimulus onto the macroscopic collective decision-making that affects several crucial prerequisites for efficient and effective brood production and population growth in honeybee colonies.

Discarding optimality: Throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Reward Rate ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Standard Observer ◽  
Rate Maximization ◽  
Reward Rate Maximization ◽  
Descriptive Standard ◽  
Observer Model

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.

LPCD framework: Analytical tool or psychological model?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Danks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytical Tool ◽  
Mathematical Framework ◽  
Bayesian Decision ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Model ◽  
Psychological Reality ◽  
Psychological Theories ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Bayesian Decision Making

AbstractThe target article uses a mathematical framework derived from Bayesian decision making to demonstrate suboptimal decision making but then attributes psychological reality to the framework components. Rahnev & Denison's (R&D) positive proposal thus risks ignoring plausible psychological theories that could implement complex perceptual decision making. We must be careful not to slide from success with an analytical tool to the reality of the tool components.

Elaborating the role of reflection and individual differences in the study of folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Behavioral Responses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Economic Beliefs

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.

The primacy of conscious decision making – ERRATUM

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conscious Decision

The primacy of conscious decision making – RETRACTION

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conscious Decision

Abstraction: An alternative neurocognitive account of recognition, prediction, and decision making

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie F. Reyna ◽  
David A. Broniatowski
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Software Engineering ◽  
Systems Engineering ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Trace Theory ◽  
Fuzzy Trace Theory ◽  
Abstract Representations ◽  
Technical Systems

Abstract Gilead et al. offer a thoughtful and much-needed treatment of abstraction. However, it fails to build on an extensive literature on abstraction, representational diversity, neurocognition, and psychopathology that provides important constraints and alternative evidence-based conceptions. We draw on conceptions in software engineering, socio-technical systems engineering, and a neurocognitive theory with abstract representations of gist at its core, fuzzy-trace theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document