Movement Behavior for Soldier Agents on a Virtual Battlefield

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas A. Reece

We have developed a movement behavior model for soldier agents who populate a virtual battlefield environment. Whereas many simulations have addressed human movement behavior before, none of them has comprehensively addressed realistic military movement at individual and unit levels. To design an appropriate movement behavior model, we found it necessary to elaborate all of the requirements on movement from the military tasks of interest, define a behavior architecture that encompasses all required movement tasks, select appropriate movement planning and control approaches in light of the requirements, and implement the planning and control algorithms with novel enhancements to achieve satisfactory results. The breadth of requirements in this problem domain makes simple behavior architectures inadequate and prevents any single planning approach from easily accomplishing all tasks. In our behavior architecture, a hierarchy of tasks is distributed over unit leaders and unit members. For movement planning, we use an A* search algorithm on a hybrid search space comprising a two-dimensional regular grid and a topological map; the plan produced is a series of waypoints annotated with posture and speed changes. Individuals control movement with reactive steering behaviors. The result is a system that can realistically plan and execute a variety of unit and individual agent movement tasks on a virtual battlefield.

2006 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 1358-1369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerben Rotman ◽  
Nikolaus F. Troje ◽  
Roland S. Johansson ◽  
J. Randall Flanagan

We previously showed that, when observers watch an actor performing a predictable block-stacking task, the coordination between the observer's gaze and the actor's hand is similar to the coordination between the actor's gaze and hand. Both the observer and the actor direct gaze to forthcoming grasp and block landing sites and shift their gaze to the next grasp or landing site at around the time the hand contacts the block or the block contacts the landing site. Here we compare observers' gaze behavior in a block manipulation task when the observers did and when they did not know, in advance, which of two blocks the actor would pick up first. In both cases, observers managed to fixate the target ahead of the actor's hand and showed proactive gaze behavior. However, these target fixations occurred later, relative to the actor's movement, when observers did not know the target block in advance. In perceptual tests, in which observers watched animations of the actor reaching partway to the target and had to guess which block was the target, we found that the time at which observers were able to correctly do so was very similar to the time at which they would make saccades to the target block. Overall, our results indicate that observers use gaze in a fashion that is appropriate for hand movement planning and control. This in turn suggests that they implement representations of the manual actions required in the task and representations that direct task-specific eye movements.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophia Bakola ◽  
Kathleen J Burman ◽  
Sylwia Bednarek ◽  
Jonathan M Chan ◽  
Natalia Jermakov ◽  
...  

Cortical projections to the caudomedial frontal cortex were studied using retrograde tracers in marmosets. We tested the hypothesis that cytoarchitectural area 6M includes homologues of the supplementary and pre-supplementary motor areas (SMA and preSMA) of other primates. We found that, irrespective of the injection sites' location within 6M, over half of the labeled neurons were located in motor and premotor areas. Other connections originated in prefrontal area 8b, ventral anterior and posterior cingulate areas, somatosensory areas (3a and 1-2), and areas on the rostral aspect of the dorsal posterior parietal cortex. Although the origin of afferents was similar, injections in rostral 6M received higher percentages of prefrontal afferents, and fewer somatosensory afferents, compared to caudal injections, compatible with differentiation into SMA and preSMA. Injections rostral to 6M (area 8b) revealed a very different set of connections, with increased emphasis in prefrontal and posterior cingulate afferents, and fewer parietal afferents. The connections of 6M were also quantitatively different from those of M1, dorsal premotor areas, and cingulate motor area 24d. These results show that the cortical motor control circuit is conserved in simian primates, indicating that marmosets can be valuable models for studying movement planning and control.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document