Norm Internalisation in Human and Artificial Intelligence

Neumann, Martín

doi:10.18564/jasss.1582

Cited by 21 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thanks to such a model of norm internalization, it will be possible to adapt existing agent architectures (see EMIL-A, [2,15]) and to design a simulation platform to test and answer a number of hypotheses and questions such as: which types of mental properties and ingredients ought individuals to possess in order to 1 See [40], for an overview of the research on Norm Internalization. 0921-7126/10/$27.50 © 2010 -IOS Press and the authors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Norm internalization in artificial societies

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Internalization is at study in social-behavioural sciences and moral philosophy since long; of late, the debate was revamped within the rationality approach to the study of cooperation and compliance since internalization is a less costly and more reliable enforcement system than social control. But how does it work? So far, poor attention was paid to the mental underpinnings of internalization. This paper advocates a rich cognitive model of different types, degrees and factors of internalization. In order to check the individual and social effect of internalization, we have adapted an existing agent architecture, EMIL-A, providing it with internalization capabilities, turning it into EMIL-I-A. Experiments have proven satisfactory results with respect to the maintenance of cooperation in a proof-of-concept simulation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Norm internalization in artificial societies

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Figure 4 shows the simulation results for the BDI with a single goal, G N . The figure shows the distribution of submissions between t[1] to t [15]. The figure shows an expected submission spike at t [5] due to the absence of other goals, GPD or GPM during the obligation period.…”

Section: Simulation and Analysis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The figure shows the distribution of submissions between t[1] to t [15]. About 18 agents submitted in the Disliked period at t [13] and t [14] and more than 50 agents submitted in the Prohibited period.…”

Section: Figure 5 Simulation With Bdi and Multiple Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…and G PD Figure 8 shows the results of simulation with the Sacrifice and Diligence functions. The results show the distribution of submissions between t[1] and t [15], indicating that the agents' performance is very much improved. All agents (99%) managed to submit the documents within the Recommended and Neutrality period.…”

Section: Mode E -Bdi With Sacrifice and Diligence Function And With mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this instance, violations could occur when agents attempt to achieve their personal goals, hence affecting their normative goal. Consequently, norms internalization [15] is an important issue to consider when agents regulate the norms without coercion and at the same time accomplish their personal goals. A typical scenario for such instance could be a student who needs to submit an assignment in four weeks time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Resolving Conflicts between Personal and Normative Goals in Normative Agent Systems

Ahmad

Ahmed

Yusof

et al. 2016

JITA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we present a framework for resolving conflicts between personal and normative goals in normative agent systems. The conflicts occur in the decision making process of time-constrained tasks of those goals. The agents observe the environment and perform the tasks based on their obligation to an authority, their desires, and intentions. They select and execute the tasks from a set of pre-compiled tasks based on their beliefs of the reward and penalty associated with the selected tasks. To resolve the conflicts within the constraint of the tasks’ duration, we supplement the agents’ normative capacity with two essential functions: Sacrifice and Diligence. The Sacrifice function enables an agent to reason and discard any tasks that have lower priorities to make way for accomplishment of the normative goal. The Diligence function enables an agent to increase its effort in accomplishing the normative goal in time-constrained situations. We simulate these situations and present the results.

show abstract

Integrating CAFCA—A Lens to Interpret Social Phenomena

Elsenbroich

Verhagen

2021

Springer Proceedings in Complexity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Norm Internalisation in Human and Artificial Intelligence

Cited by 21 publications

References 14 publications

Norm internalization in artificial societies

Norm internalization in artificial societies

Resolving Conflicts between Personal and Normative Goals in Normative Agent Systems

Integrating CAFCA—A Lens to Interpret Social Phenomena

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About