CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9Artificial Intelligence in GamesNarrative Theory and AnalysisAI-based Problem Solving and Planning

A Plan-Based Personality Model for Story Characters

Open access
Shirvani, Alireza, Ware, Stephen G.·2019·Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment
DOI 10.1609/aiide.v15i1.5243
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Believable virtual characters enhance the experience of interactive virtual worlds. BDI-based state-space narrative planners make their characters more compelling by granting them specific goals to pursue and different (possibly wrong) beliefs about the state of the world. However, such systems do not account for character individuality. We extend work on narrative planning by proposing a personality model based on the Big Five. This paper discusses how each factor of the Big Five is represented by narrative planning features. We also present a study to evaluate whether human readers can perceive the modeled personality traits through simple action patterns in short stories.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aiide.v15i1.5243

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Using psychological models, such as the Big Five Personality Model, to design NPCs can lead to more nuanced interactions and increased player engagement.

    “Researchers and industry practitioners have demonstrated that using psychological models, such as the Big Five Personality Model, to design NPCs can lead to more nuanced interactions and increased player engagement (Isbister 2022; Shirvani and Ware 2019; Soto and Jackson 2020; Garavaglia et al. 2022).”

    From PANGeA: Procedural Artificial Narrative Using Generative AI for Turn-Based, Role-Playing Video Games (2024) · cites this paper as Shirvani and Ware 2019

    The Introduction and Conclusions and Future Works describe a Big Five–based model intended to create more distinctive virtual characters, and the Evaluation tests whether readers perceive those characters’ traits. The paper does not report more nuanced NPC–player interactions or increased player engagement; enhancing immersion is stated as a goal, not a measured outcome. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. André, E.; Klesen, M.; Gebhard, P.; Allen, S.; and Rist, T. 1999. Integrating models of personality and emotions into lifelike characters. In International Workshop on Affective Interactions, 150-165. Springer.
  2. Bahamón, J. C., and Young, R. M. 2013. CB- POCL: a choice-based algorithm for character personality in planning-based narrative generation. In 2013 Workshop on Computational Models of Narrative. Schloss Dagstuhl- Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.
  3. Bahamón, J. C., and Young, R. M. 2017. An empirical eval- uation of a generative method for the expression of personal- ity traits through action choice. In Thirteenth AAAI Interna- tional Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment, 144-150.
  4. Bahamón, J. C.; Barot, C.; and Young, R. M. 2015. A goal-based model of personality for planning-based narra- tive generation. In Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Arti- ficial Intelligence, Student Abstract Track.
  5. DeYoung, C. G.; Quilty, L. C.; and Peterson, J. B. 2007. Be- tween facets and domains: 10 aspects of the big five. Journal of personality and social psychology 93(5):880.
  6. Egges, A.; Kshirsagar, S.; and Magnenat-Thalmann, N. 2003. A model for personality and emotion simulation. In International Conference on Knowledge-Based and In- telligent Information and Engineering Systems, 453-461.
  7. Gebhard, P., and Kipp, K. H. 2006. Are computer-generated emotions and moods plausible to humans? In Sixth Inter- national Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, 343-356.
  8. Goldberg, L. R. 1992. The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Psychological assessment 4(1):26.
  9. Hofstee, W. K.; De Raad, B.; and Goldberg, L. R. 1992. Integration of the big five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy 63(1):146.
  10. Poznanski, M., and Thagard, P. 2005. Changing personali- ties: towards realistic virtual characters. Journal of Experi- mental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 17(3):221-241.
  11. Riedl, M. O., and Young, R. M. 2010. Narrative planning: Balancing plot and character. Journal of Artificial Intelli- gence Research 39:217-268.
  12. Samuel, B.; Reed, A.; Short, E.; Heck, S.; Robison, B.; Wright, L.; Soule, T.; Treanor, M.; McCoy, J.; Sullivan, A.; et al. 2018. Playable experiences at AIIDE 2018. In Four- teenth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Enter- tainment Conference.
  13. Shirvani, A.; Farrell, R.; and Ware, S. G. 2018. Combin- ing intentionality and belief: Revisiting believable character plans. In Fourteenth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment Conference.
  14. Shirvani, A.; Ware, S. G.; and Farrell, R. 2017. A possible worlds model of belief for state-space narrative planning. In Thirteenth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment Conference.
  15. Teutenberg, J., and Porteous, J. 2015. Incorporating global and local knowledge in intentional narrative planning. In International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi- agent Systems, 1539-1546.
  16. Ware, S. G., and Young, R. M. 2014. Glaive: a state-space narrative planner supporting intentionality and conflict. In Tenth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Enter- tainment Conference.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shirvani, A., & Ware, S. G.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment
Publisher
Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)
Published
2019-10-08
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
188-194
ISSN
  • 2326-909X (ISSN-L)
  • 2334-0924
DOI
10.1609/aiide.v15i1.5243
OpenAlex
W2982327935
Cited by
9
References
2
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.67
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment (publishedVersion)
  • AAAI Publications (The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1647427)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Keywords
Big Five personality traits, narrative planning, BDI agents, state-space planning, interactive virtual worlds

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review