Analyzing the performance of "winner-take-all" and "voting-based" action selection policies within the two-resource problem

Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Subseries of Lecture Notes in Computer Science)

Volumn 2801, Issue , 2003, Pages 733-742

  Avila García, Orlando ^a   Cañamero, Lola ^a   Boekhorst, Renéte ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; PROBLEM SOLVING; SOCIAL SCIENCES COMPUTING; COMPUTERS;

ACTION SELECTION; AUTONOMOUS CREATURE; RESOLVING CONFLICTS;

LAW ENFORCEMENT; ROBOTICS;

ACTION SELECTION; ROBOTIC ARCHITECTURES; SYSTEMATIC EXPERIMENTATION; WINNER TAKE ALLS;

EID: 7444221389     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-39432-7_79     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. Ashby,W.R. (1952). Design for a Brain. London: Chapman and Hall.
2. Avila-García, O. and Cañamero, L. (2002). A comparison of Behavior Selection Architectures Using Viability Indicators. In Proc. International Workshop on Biologically-Inspired Robotics: The Legacy of W. Grey Walter. 14-16 August 2002, Bristol HP Labs, UK.
3. Blumberg, B. (1994).Action Selection in Hamsterdam: Lessons from Ethology. In Proc. Third Intl. Conf. on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior (SAB94). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Cañamero, L.D. (1997). Modeling Motivations and Emotions as a Basis for Intelligent Behavior. In W.L. Johnson, ed., Proc. First Intl. Conf. on Autonomous Agents, 148-155. New York: ACM Press.
5. Cañamero, L., Avila-García, O., Hafner, E. 2002. First Experiments Relating Behavior Selection Architectures to Environmental Complexity. In Proc. 2002 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2002), 3024-3029. IEEE Press.
6. Girard, B., Cuzin,V., Guillot, A., Gurney, K.N., and Prescott, T.J. (2002). Comparing a Brain-Inspired Robot Action Selection Mechanism with 'Winner-Takes-All'. In Proc. Seventh Intl. Conf. on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Maes, P. (1991). A Bottom-Up Mechanism for Behavior Selection in an Artificial Creature. In J.A. Meyer and S.W.Wilson, eds. Proc. First Intl. Conf. on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, 238-246. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. McFarland, D. (1974). Experimental Investigation of Motivational State. In D. McFarland, ed., Motivational Control Systems Analysis, 251-282. London: Academic Press.
9. McFarland, D. (1976). Form and function in the temporal organization of behavior. Growing Points in Ethology, Bateson P., Hinde R. ed. Cambridge University Press.
10. McFarland, D. and Sibly, R. (1975). The behavioural final common path. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (Series B), 270, 265-293.
11. Spier, E. and McFarland, D. (1997). Basic Cycles, Utility and Opportunism in Self-Sufficient Robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 20, 179-190.
12. Spier, E. andMcFarland, D. (1997). Possibly Optimal Decision Making under Self-Sufficiency and Autonomy. Journal of theoretical biology, 189, 317-331.
13. Tyrrell, T. (1993). Computational Mechanism for Action Selection. PhD. Thesis, Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburg.