基于BDI Agent的CGF主体行为建模理论与技术研究
|
摘要
CGF 建模技术是近年来随着先进分布仿真和人工智能技术发展而兴起的一门新
的仿真建模领域。它的突出特点是利用计算机来代替真实的作战训练人员和武器装
备,再现其在真实系统中的角色和职能,从而能够极大地降低训练费用和组织联合
训练的难度。CGF 建模包括环境建模、物理建模和行为建模。环境建模给 CGF 提供
一个虚拟战场;物理建模为 CGF 提供逼真的外观,使其与真实兵力“形似”;而行
为建模则是对 CGF 的内部思维活动建模,使其与真实兵力“神似”,是 CGF 建模技
术的核心和难点。
建立 CGF 的行为模型不同于原有的物理建模,要面对大量不确定且难以形式化
的因素,涉及行为的推理、决策和知识学习等方面的内容,实现难度很大。目前 CGF
的行为模型集中在简单的反应式行为层次上,高级智能行为涉及不多,且多采用专
家系统形式实现。同时 CGF 的行为不是由 CGF 自身控制,系统耦合紧。
基于以上的背景,本文结合一个具体的应用项目运用 BDI agent 技术从个体的层
面上深入研究 CGF 主体的行为建模理论及技术。论文的主要思路可分为三个层次:
一是将 CGF 主体的行为分为内在行为和外在行为,并认为 CGF 主体的外在行为输
出是基于其内在行为的。二是将 CGF 主体的内在行为表示分为理性行为模型和行为
差异模型,并认为 CGF 主体的内在行为是由 CGF 主体的理性行为模型决定,但受
行为差异模型影响。三是将 CGF 主体的理性行为进一步分为感知行为、决策行为和
学习行为。
论文的主要工作包括:
1.对计算机生成兵力和行为建模技术的基础理论进行了综述。
2.从总体上描述了 CGF 主体的行为产生机制和行为表示方法。通过信念、愿
望和意图及其相互关系来分析说明 CGF 主体的内在行为的产生过程,形式化地阐述
CGF 主体的外在行为输出的内在机理;提出一种表示外在行为的输出框架,并定义
一组基于行为输出框架的行为运算,以此将一个意图分解为一系列元行为。
3.建立了 CGF 主体感知行为的描述性模型和可计算模型。这样既描述了感知
行为的产生过程,同时保证建立在描述性模型之上的可计算模型能应用于自治的仿
真环境中。
4.建立了 CGF 主体的决策行为模型,着重分析了决策的风险特性和时间特性。
分析了加入感知行为后,对决策行为复杂性的影响;提出了一种不确定型决策方法
III
用于处理不完全感知信息对决策行为的影响。
5.在 CGF 主体的行为模型加入学习行为,分析了 CGF 主体学习行为框架,和
在该框架下实现学习的两种方式:离线学习和在线学习。建立了各自的学习模型,
并进行了形式化描述,给出了各自的学习算法。
6.从个体的角度研究影响 CGF 主体理性行为的若干重要行为因素,并探讨其
在作战仿真中的应用。根据行为科学和心理学的研究成果,分析了影响 CGF 主体行
为的各种主要因素,探讨了应用上述定性分析的结果建立行为因素影响 CGF 主体行
为输出的行为差异模型。
7.研究了构造仿真系统中仿真成员的行为建模问题。以通信对抗仿真训练系统
为背景,描述 CGF 主体的行为建模实现方法。
本文认为,建立 CGF 主体的行为模型是构造 CGF 系统的核心和难点所在。Agent
技术具有良好的自治性、自主性、反应性和社会性等特点,能够用来解决传统的人
工智能所不能解决的环境适应性、信息不完全性等问题,比较适合建立 CGF 主体的
行为模型。CGF 主体的内部行为是由信念、愿望、意图和知识等内在状态决定的,
通过感知、决策、学习等内在行为产生的;CGF 主体的行为输出是由理性行为模型
决定,但受各种内外部行为因素影响。随着对 CGF 主体行为建模的进一步深入研究,
必将促进计算机生成兵力技术和仿真建模技术的进一步发展,并使计算机生成兵力
成为军事仿真训练的有力工具。
The technique of the CGF modeling is being a new field of modeling and simulation
with the development of Advanced Distributed Simulation and Artificial Intelligence. It
can make computer behave like real combatant and military equipment, so computer can
replace them, and the outlay and difficulty of training are greatly reduced. The CGF model
consists of environment model, physics model and behavioral model. A virtual realistic
battlefield is provided for the CGF agent by environment model. A realistic appearance is
built by physics model. But behavioral model refer to represent the mental thinking
activity, is the core and nodus in constructing the CGF system.
There are many uncertainty factors that are difficult to be formalized, when we model
the CGF’s behavior, which is different from the physics model. Modeling the CGF’s
behavior is very difficult, because it involves in the reasoning, decision-making and
learning of behavior. At present, the behavioral model of the CGF is simple and reactive,
lack of advanced intelligent. It is usually developed with Expert System. At the same time,
the CGF’s behavior is not under the control of itself. The system is coupled tightly.
Based on the analysis above, the paper investigates thoroughly technique and
application of behavior modeling by the BDI agent from the level of entity, integrating
with an application. It can be divided into three levels. Firstly, the behavior of CGF agent
is divided into mental behavior and outer behavior, and the outer behavior is based on the
mental behavior. Secondly, the mental behavior of the CGF agent is denoted by rational
behavioral model and behavioral difference model. The mental behavior is determined by
rational behavior model, and influenced by behavioral difference model. Thirdly, the
rational behavior of the CGF agent consists of perceiving, decision-making and learning.
The main efforts are outlined as follows:
1. The theory foundations of CGF and behavior modeling are summarized.
2. The output mechanism and expression of CGF’s behavior are described as a whole.
The output process of the CGF’s mental behavior is explained through the Belief, Desire,
Intension and their relation. The inherent mechanism of the outer behavior is formalized.
An behavioral framework to express the outer behavior is put forward. A set of behavioral
calculation are defined base on the framework, in order to decompose Intension into a
series of meta-behaviors.
V
3. The descriptive and prescriptive models of the perceiving behavior of the CGF are
built. The prescriptive model, which is based on the descriptive model, is ensured to be
applied into the autonomous simulated environment.
4. The decision of CGF is modeled. And the characteristics of risk and time of
decision are analyzed. The impacts of introduction of the perceiving behavior on the
complexity of decision behavior are analyzed. Subsequently, an uncertainty decision
method is given, which is used to deal with the impact of incomplete perceiving
information on decision.
5. The learning behavior is added into the behavior model of the CGF, and the
framework of learning of the CGF is brought forward. The alternative model of offline
learning and online learning are built and formalized. And the alternative arithmetic is
given.
Several important behavioral factors, which influenced on the rational behavior of the
CGF, are investigated from the point of view of the entity according the research of
behavioral science and psychology. The issue of the application of the factors is discussed
in the military simulation. Subsequently the behavioral difference model is given based on
the result of qualitative analysis above.
7. The behavioral modeling of simulation member in the constructed simulation is
researched. The realization of behavior modeling of the CGF is described.
We conclude that modeling the behavior of the CGF is the core and nodus in the
resea
的仿真建模领域。它的突出特点是利用计算机来代替真实的作战训练人员和武器装
备,再现其在真实系统中的角色和职能,从而能够极大地降低训练费用和组织联合
训练的难度。CGF 建模包括环境建模、物理建模和行为建模。环境建模给 CGF 提供
一个虚拟战场;物理建模为 CGF 提供逼真的外观,使其与真实兵力“形似”;而行
为建模则是对 CGF 的内部思维活动建模,使其与真实兵力“神似”,是 CGF 建模技
术的核心和难点。
建立 CGF 的行为模型不同于原有的物理建模,要面对大量不确定且难以形式化
的因素,涉及行为的推理、决策和知识学习等方面的内容,实现难度很大。目前 CGF
的行为模型集中在简单的反应式行为层次上,高级智能行为涉及不多,且多采用专
家系统形式实现。同时 CGF 的行为不是由 CGF 自身控制,系统耦合紧。
基于以上的背景,本文结合一个具体的应用项目运用 BDI agent 技术从个体的层
面上深入研究 CGF 主体的行为建模理论及技术。论文的主要思路可分为三个层次:
一是将 CGF 主体的行为分为内在行为和外在行为,并认为 CGF 主体的外在行为输
出是基于其内在行为的。二是将 CGF 主体的内在行为表示分为理性行为模型和行为
差异模型,并认为 CGF 主体的内在行为是由 CGF 主体的理性行为模型决定,但受
行为差异模型影响。三是将 CGF 主体的理性行为进一步分为感知行为、决策行为和
学习行为。
论文的主要工作包括:
1.对计算机生成兵力和行为建模技术的基础理论进行了综述。
2.从总体上描述了 CGF 主体的行为产生机制和行为表示方法。通过信念、愿
望和意图及其相互关系来分析说明 CGF 主体的内在行为的产生过程,形式化地阐述
CGF 主体的外在行为输出的内在机理;提出一种表示外在行为的输出框架,并定义
一组基于行为输出框架的行为运算,以此将一个意图分解为一系列元行为。
3.建立了 CGF 主体感知行为的描述性模型和可计算模型。这样既描述了感知
行为的产生过程,同时保证建立在描述性模型之上的可计算模型能应用于自治的仿
真环境中。
4.建立了 CGF 主体的决策行为模型,着重分析了决策的风险特性和时间特性。
分析了加入感知行为后,对决策行为复杂性的影响;提出了一种不确定型决策方法
III
用于处理不完全感知信息对决策行为的影响。
5.在 CGF 主体的行为模型加入学习行为,分析了 CGF 主体学习行为框架,和
在该框架下实现学习的两种方式:离线学习和在线学习。建立了各自的学习模型,
并进行了形式化描述,给出了各自的学习算法。
6.从个体的角度研究影响 CGF 主体理性行为的若干重要行为因素,并探讨其
在作战仿真中的应用。根据行为科学和心理学的研究成果,分析了影响 CGF 主体行
为的各种主要因素,探讨了应用上述定性分析的结果建立行为因素影响 CGF 主体行
为输出的行为差异模型。
7.研究了构造仿真系统中仿真成员的行为建模问题。以通信对抗仿真训练系统
为背景,描述 CGF 主体的行为建模实现方法。
本文认为,建立 CGF 主体的行为模型是构造 CGF 系统的核心和难点所在。Agent
技术具有良好的自治性、自主性、反应性和社会性等特点,能够用来解决传统的人
工智能所不能解决的环境适应性、信息不完全性等问题,比较适合建立 CGF 主体的
行为模型。CGF 主体的内部行为是由信念、愿望、意图和知识等内在状态决定的,
通过感知、决策、学习等内在行为产生的;CGF 主体的行为输出是由理性行为模型
决定,但受各种内外部行为因素影响。随着对 CGF 主体行为建模的进一步深入研究,
必将促进计算机生成兵力技术和仿真建模技术的进一步发展,并使计算机生成兵力
成为军事仿真训练的有力工具。
The technique of the CGF modeling is being a new field of modeling and simulation
with the development of Advanced Distributed Simulation and Artificial Intelligence. It
can make computer behave like real combatant and military equipment, so computer can
replace them, and the outlay and difficulty of training are greatly reduced. The CGF model
consists of environment model, physics model and behavioral model. A virtual realistic
battlefield is provided for the CGF agent by environment model. A realistic appearance is
built by physics model. But behavioral model refer to represent the mental thinking
activity, is the core and nodus in constructing the CGF system.
There are many uncertainty factors that are difficult to be formalized, when we model
the CGF’s behavior, which is different from the physics model. Modeling the CGF’s
behavior is very difficult, because it involves in the reasoning, decision-making and
learning of behavior. At present, the behavioral model of the CGF is simple and reactive,
lack of advanced intelligent. It is usually developed with Expert System. At the same time,
the CGF’s behavior is not under the control of itself. The system is coupled tightly.
Based on the analysis above, the paper investigates thoroughly technique and
application of behavior modeling by the BDI agent from the level of entity, integrating
with an application. It can be divided into three levels. Firstly, the behavior of CGF agent
is divided into mental behavior and outer behavior, and the outer behavior is based on the
mental behavior. Secondly, the mental behavior of the CGF agent is denoted by rational
behavioral model and behavioral difference model. The mental behavior is determined by
rational behavior model, and influenced by behavioral difference model. Thirdly, the
rational behavior of the CGF agent consists of perceiving, decision-making and learning.
The main efforts are outlined as follows:
1. The theory foundations of CGF and behavior modeling are summarized.
2. The output mechanism and expression of CGF’s behavior are described as a whole.
The output process of the CGF’s mental behavior is explained through the Belief, Desire,
Intension and their relation. The inherent mechanism of the outer behavior is formalized.
An behavioral framework to express the outer behavior is put forward. A set of behavioral
calculation are defined base on the framework, in order to decompose Intension into a
series of meta-behaviors.
V
3. The descriptive and prescriptive models of the perceiving behavior of the CGF are
built. The prescriptive model, which is based on the descriptive model, is ensured to be
applied into the autonomous simulated environment.
4. The decision of CGF is modeled. And the characteristics of risk and time of
decision are analyzed. The impacts of introduction of the perceiving behavior on the
complexity of decision behavior are analyzed. Subsequently, an uncertainty decision
method is given, which is used to deal with the impact of incomplete perceiving
information on decision.
5. The learning behavior is added into the behavior model of the CGF, and the
framework of learning of the CGF is brought forward. The alternative model of offline
learning and online learning are built and formalized. And the alternative arithmetic is
given.
Several important behavioral factors, which influenced on the rational behavior of the
CGF, are investigated from the point of view of the entity according the research of
behavioral science and psychology. The issue of the application of the factors is discussed
in the military simulation. Subsequently the behavioral difference model is given based on
the result of qualitative analysis above.
7. The behavioral modeling of simulation member in the constructed simulation is
researched. The realization of behavior modeling of the CGF is described.
We conclude that modeling the behavior of the CGF is the core and nodus in the
resea
引文
[1] Richard W. Pew, Anne S. Mavor. Modelling human and organization behavior: Application to
Military Simulations. National Academic Press, Washington, D.C. 1998
[2] Richard W. Pew and Anne S. Mavor. Representation Human Behavior in Military
Simulations: Iterim Report (1997)
[3] 胡晓峰. 美军训练模拟. 北京:国防大学出版社. 2001.3
[4] Tom Hughes. Human Behavioral Representation Requirements for Integrated Air Defense
System. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[5] 龚光红. DIS 环境下的计算机生成兵力研究[博士学位论文]. 北京航空航天大学. 1997.3.
[6] Amy E. Henninger, Avelino J. Gonzalez. Modeling Semi-Automated Forces with Neural
Networks: Performance Improvement through a Modular Approach. Proceeding of the 11th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 2002
[7] http://www.ist.ucf.edu/labsproj/projects/isf.htm
[8] Randolph Jones, Eric Chown. Interfacing Emotional Behavior Moderators with Intelligent
Synthetic Forces. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[9] Douglas Reece, Derrick Franceschini, Steven Hursh. ModSAF as a Model of Cognition.
Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[10] Anthony Courtemanche, Rob Wittman. OneSAF: A Product Line Approach for a
Next-Generation CGF. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces
and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[11] Soar/IFOR Documentation. http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/ifor/
[12] Susie M. Hartzog, Marnie R. Salisbury. Command Forces (CFOR) Program Status Report.
Proceeding of the 6th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, July, 1996
[13] 王昌金, 龚光红, 王行仁. 计算机生成兵力. 北京航空航天大学学报(控制与仿真专辑).
Vol. 25 No. 3 1999.
[14] 刘秀罗. CGF 建模相关技术及其在指挥控制建模中的应用研究[博士学位论文]. 国防科
110
技大学. 2001.10
[15] 刘秀罗,黄柯逮. 有限状态机在 CGF 行为建模中的应用. 系统仿真学报. 2001.9
[16] 刘秀罗.数学化仿真世界:CGF 行为建模问题. 计算机世界,2001.5
[17] 杨立功,郭齐胜. 计算机生成兵力的研究进展. 计算机仿真,Vol. 17, No. 3, 2000.5
[18] 周秉锋. UML 软件建模. 北京:北京大学出版社. 2001 年 11
[19] 行为建模技术. www.buct.edu.cn/mech/html/act_model.htm
[20] 防火墙封阻应用攻击技术综述. http://www.tele21.com.cn/jiaoliu/show.asp?classid=835
[21] 涂晓媛,陈弘娟,涂序彦.“人工鱼”及虚拟海底世界建模方案. http://www.swm.com.cn/rj/
2000-4/20000414.html
[22] Edward D, Taylor C, Sneld D J. Artificial Intelligence in Command and control. Signal, 1998
[23] Lucia Falzon, Mike Davies. Behavioral Representation Challenges in Theatre-Level Planning
Support. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[24] Jose B.Cruz, Jr., Marwan A. Simaan, Aca Gacic, Huihui Jiang. Modeling and Control of
Military Operations against Adversarial Control. Proceedings of the 39th IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control, Sydney, Australia, December, 2000
[25] Scott Harmon. A Taxonomy of Human Behavior Representation Requirements. Proceeding of
the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2002
[26] Sheila B. Banks, Martin R. Stytz. Advancing the State of Human Behavior Representation for
Modeling and Simulation: Technologies and Techniques. Proceeding of the 9th Conference
on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[27] Lyle Bloom. Modeling Adaptive, Asymmetric Behaviors. Proceeding of the 12th Conference
on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2003
[28] Chris Forsythe, Patrick Xavier. Human Emulation: Progress Toward Realistic Synthetic
Human Agents. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[29] Evan Rolek, Tom Hughes. A Strategy for Defining Human Representation Requirements.
Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[30] S. Y. Harmon, Zetetix. A Theory for Representing Human Behavior in Simulation. Procee-
ding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation.
111
Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[31] N. R. Jennings, K. Sycara, M. Wooldridge. A Roadmap of Agent Research and Development.
Int. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. 1998,1(1): 7-338
[32] C. A. Iglesias, M. Garijo, J. C. Gonzalez. A survey of agent-Oriented methodologies. In:
Intelligent Agents V (LNAI vol. 1555), Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 1999
[33] Tom Hughes, Evan Rolek. Human Behavioral Representation Requirements for an Integrated
Air Defense System
[34] 史忠植. 智能主体及应用(第 1 版). 北京:科学出版社. 2000.12
[35] Silvia Coradeschi, Lars Karlsson, Anders Torne. Intelligent Agent for Aircraft Combat
Simulation [Online]. Available http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cache/papers/cs/2009/
[36] 王红卫. 建模与仿真. 北京:科学出版社. 2003.3
[37] Karen Harper, Stephen Ho, Greg Zacharias. Intelligent Hostile Urban Threat Agents for
MOUT Operations [online]. Available http://www.charlesriveranalytics.com/publications/
papers/IHUT%20Manuscript.pdf
[38] Peter Clark, Helen Pongracic, Arvind Chandran. Researching the Use of Agent-Based CGF in
Human-in-the Loop Simulation. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[39] Sui Qing, How Khee Yin, Darren Ong Wee Sze. An Intelligent Agent in an Air Combat
Domain. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[40] Robert J. Might, Richard D. Dubois. Conceptual Modeling of Human Behavior (CMHB).
Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[41] 章士嵘. 认知科学导论(第 1 版). 北京:人民出版社,1992.4
[42] 陈霖,朱滢,陈永明. 心理学与认知科学. 21 世纪初科学发展趋势(第 1 版). 北京:科学
出版社,1996.9.100-110
[43] Rao, Geogreff. Modeling rational agents with a BDI-architecture. Proceedings of the second
international conference on principles of KRR, Morgan Kaufmann, 1991
[44] Cohen P R, Levesque H J. Intension is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence,
1990.42
[45] Rao, Georgeff. Modeling agents within a BDI architecture. In Fikes and Sandewall eds., Proc.
Of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1991
112
[46] 姚莉,张维明. 智能协作信息技术. 北京:电子工业出版社. 2002.4
[47] Y. Shoham. Agent-oriented programming. Artificial Intelligence. 1993,60:51-92
[48] M. Wooldridge, N. R. Jennings. Intelligent Agents: Theory and Practice. The Knowledge
Engineering Review, 1995, 10(2): 115-152.
[49] Rao, Geogeff. BDI agents: From Theory to Practice. In: Proc. Of the 1st International Conf.
on Multi-agent Systems. San Francisco. AAAI Press, 1995
[50] Rao A S, Georgeff M P. An abstract architecture for rational agents. In: Proc. of the 3rd
international conference on principles of knowledge and reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann,
1992
[51] 曾伟. 基于 MAS 的系统组织建模与设计[博士学位论文]. 华中科技大学系统工程研究
所,2000
[52] 辞海编辑委员会. 辞海. 上海:上海辞书出版社. 1999.9
[53] 辞海编辑委员会. 辞海. 上海:上海辞书出版社. 1979.4
[54] 许宁宁. 行为科学百科全书. 北京 : 中国劳动出版社. 1992.1
[55] 联合 99 工程技术报告 [内部资料]
[56] Nils LaVine, Lee Napravnik, Steven Peters. An Advanced Software Architecture for
Behavioral Representation within Computer Generated Forces. Proceeding of the 11th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 2002
[57] Robert B. Calder, John Drummey. Definition of a Military Intelligent Agent Architecture.
Proceeding of the 8th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1999
[58] S. David Kwak, Lockheed Martin. A Multiple Paradigm Behavior Architecture: COREBA
(Cognition Oriented Emergent Behavior Architecture). 1998 Fall Simulation Interoperability
Workshop.
[59] David N. Back. Agent-Based Soldier Behavior in Dynamic 3D Virtual Environments.
[Doctoral Thesis]. NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL. March 2002
[60] Rosaldo J.F. Rossetti, Rafael H. Bordini, Ana L.C. Bazzan. Using BDI Agents to Improve
Driver Modeling in a Commuter Scenario. Transportation Research Part C, 2002,10:373-379
[61] Karen A. Harper, Nick Ton, Kirby Jacobs, et al. Graphical Agent Development Environment
for Human Behavior Representation. Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
113
[62] Jared Freeman, Frederick J. Diedrich, Craig Haimson. Behavioral Representations for
Training Tactical Communication Skills. Proceeding of the 12th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2003
[63] Scott H. Smith. CAML: A Cognition and Action Modeling Language. Proceeding of the 7th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 1998
[64] 郑义,李思昆,胡成军等. 虚拟实体对象的建模方法研究. 国防科学技术大学学报,Vol.
20, No.1, 1998
[65] 郑义,李思昆,曾亮. 虚拟战场实体行为建模技术. 计算机应用,Vol. 20, Supp1, 2000.8
[66] 庞国峰,郝爱民,梁晓辉. 一种计算机生成兵力系统自治实体行为描述原语. 系统仿真
学报,Vol. 12, No. 4, 2000.7
[67] Cagatay Undeger, Veysi Isler, Ziya Ipekkan. An Intelligent Action Algorithm for Virtual
Human Agents. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[68] Andy Ceranowicz, Paul E. Nielsen, Frank V. Koss. Behavioral Representation In JSAF.
Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[69] Jonathan Gratch. Task-decomposition Planning for Command Decision Making. Proceeding
of the 6th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation.
Orlando, Florida, May, 1996
[70] Thomas R. Ioerger, Richard A. Volz. Modeling Cooperative, Reactive Behaviors on the
Battlefield with Intelligent Agents. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[71] 陆汝钤. 人工智能(上、下册). 北京:科学出版社,1996
[72] Robert A. Wilson, Frank C. Keil. The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. London:
MIT Press. 1999
[73] John Funge. Cognitive Modeling for Computer Generated Forces. Proceeding of the 8th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 1999
[74] Brian J. Dubas, Gary L. Waag. OPFOR Perception of the Battlespace (OPB): Challenges for
Intelligence Community Support to Military Training Simulations. 1999 Fall Simulation
Interoperability Workshop.
114
[75] Joseph Psotka, Technologies for Representing Cognition and Emotion in CGF. 1999 Summer
Simulation Interoperability Workshop.
[76] Randall W. Hill. Modeling Perceptual Attention in Virtual Humans. Proceeding of the 8th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 1999
[77] Glen G. Roussos. A Method of Implementing Entity Detections in the DIS Environment for
Use in Analysis. 15th Distributed Interactive Simulation Workshop
[78] Hemant K. Bhargava, William C. Branley. What would Ajax Have Observed? Or, Introducing
Imperfections in the Belief Systems of Autonomous Agents. Proceedings of the Twenty-
Sixth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. January 1993.
[79] 岳超源. 决策理论与方法. 北京:科学出版社. 2003.3
[80] Catherine K. Murphy. Combing Belief Functions When Evidence Conflicts. Decision
Support Systems, Vol.29, 2000
[81] Jon Doyle. Constructive Belief and Rational Representation. Computational Intelligence,
Vol5, No.1(1989), pp. 1-11
[82] G. Shafer. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1976.
[83] Peter Aykroyd, Karen Harper, Charles Hennon. Cognitive Modeling of Individual Combatant
and Small Unit Decision-Making within the Integrated Unit Simulation System. Proceeding
of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation.
Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[84] James H. Hicinbothom. Maintaining Situation Awareness in Synthetic Team Members.
Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[85] Michael R. Oakes, Mark Checchio, et al. Improved Situation Awareness and Combat Training
For USAF C2 Units. 2000 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop.
[86] Octavio Juarez-Espinosa, Cleotilde Gonzalez. MASA: Meta-Architecture for Situation
Awareness. Proceeding of the 12th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2003
[87] Ronald N. Taylor. Behavioral decision making. Glenview, IL : Scott, Foresman, 1984
[88] Mary S. Tamucci. Conceptual Modeling of Foreign Command Decision Processes. 2000
Spring Simulation Interaction Workshop
[89] Colin R. Mason, James Moffat. Representing the C2 Process in Simulations: Modeling the
115
Human Decision Making. Proceedings of the 2000 Winter Simulation Conference
[90] Christopher Barnes, Linda Elliott, Plamen Petrov, et al. Agent-based Simulation of Complex
C3 Decision-making: Issues and Opportunities. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on
Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[91] Joel Brynielsson. A Decision-Theoretic Framework Using Rational Agency. Proceeding of
the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2002
[92] Walter Warwick. Developing Computational Models of Recognition Primed Decisions:
Progress and Lessons Learned. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[93] Sven Koenig, Yaxin Liu. Simulating High-Stake Decisions. Proceeding of the 8th Conference
on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1999
[94] Rady Holbrook, Rich Souder, Michelle Rueda. Modeling of the Command and Staff Decision
Making Process-Software Requirement Analysis in WARSIM 2000
[95] Mehdi Dastani, Leendert van der Torre. Decisions and Games for BD Agents [online]. Avail-
able http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/dastani02decisions.html
[96] Ronen I. Brafman, Moshe Tennenholtz. Modeling Agents as Qualitative Decision Makers.
Artificial Intelligence, Vol94, 1997
[97] Weaver, R., Silverman, BG, et al., Modeling and Simulating Terrorist Decision-making, 10th
CGF Proceedings, 2001
[98] Sigrid Gustafson. Modeling the Terrorist Decisions of a Closed-Regime: An Illustrative
Methodology. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[99] Rob Alexander, Greg Schow. Course of Action Analysis for Corps and Division Level
Military Decision-Making. 1998 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop
[100]Dr. Stefan Krusche, Dr. Andreas Tolk, et al. Decision Support Tools II– Insights from a
German R&D Study. 2000 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop
[101]Rich Souder, Paul Walker, Ken Castner. Human Decision Making - Object Oriented Analysis
in WARSIM 2000
[102]Keith O. Hunter, William E. Hart, Chris Forsythe. A Naturalistic Decision Making Model for
Simulated Human Combatants. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
116
[103]冯俊文. 基于状态知识的决策分析方法. 系统工程与电子技术. Vol.22, No.2 2000
[104]李启明, 申立银. 风险管理中的风险效应-行为决策模型及分析. 系统工程理论与实践,
2001.10
[105] Tom M. Mitchell. Machine Learning. Beijing : China Machine Press, 2003
[106]Jinhua Zheng, Zhongzhi Shi. Autonomous Mental Development for Agent [online]. Availa
–ble http://www.cse.msu.edu/dl/SciencePaper.pdf
[107]Jalal Baghdadchi. A Learing Model for Intelligent Agents Based on Classifier Systems and
Approxiamte Reasoning. Proceedings of the 39th Conference on Decision and Control.
Sydney, Australia. December, 200
[108]Gregg Gunsch, David Mezera. On Applying Machine Learning to Develop Air Combat
Simulation Agents. 4th Annual Conference Artificial Intelligence, Simulation, and Planning
in High Autonomy Systems. Tucson, Arizona, September 20-22, 1993.
[109]Annie Wu, Hal Stringer. Learning using chunking in evolutionary algorithms. Proceeding of
the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2002
[110]Chris Gaskett, David Wettergreen, and Alexander Zelinsky: Reinforcement Learning
Applied to Control of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle, International Conference on
Field and Service Robotics, 1999. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
[111]Mark Humphrys: Action Selection Methods Using Reinforcement Learning, Thesis,
University of Cambridge, England, 1997
[112]Leslie Pack Kaelbing and Michael L. Littman: Reinforcement Learning: A Survey, Journal
of Artificial Intelligence Research 4 (1996) pp. 237-285
[113]赵卫东, 陈国华, 盛昭翰. 基于智能 Agent 的复合学习方法. 系统工程理论与实践,
2002.12
[114]齐润泉, 孙文星. 具有学习机制的软件 agent. 山东师大学报(自然科学版). Vol.16, No.2.
2001.6,
[115]李宁, 高阳. 一种基于强化学习的学习 Agent. 计算机研究与发展. Vol.38, No.9,2001.9
[116]Siegel, Wolf,Schorn. Human Performance in Continuous Operations: Description of a
Simulation Model and User’s Manual for Evaluation of Performance Degradation. ARI
Technical Report 505,AD-A101950. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and
Social Sciences,Alexandria, VA. January 1981
[117]Van Nostrand. Model Effectiveness as a Function of Personnel. CAA-SR-86-34. U.S. Army
117
Concepts Analysis Agency, Bethesda, MD.1986
[118]Davis,P.K. Modeling of Soft Factors in the RAND Strategy Assessment Center. P-7538.
Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.1989
[119]Fineberg. McClellan, Peters. Sensitizing synthetic forces to suppression on the virtual
battlefield.Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1996
[120]Eva Hudlicka, Greg Zacharias. Individual and Group Behavior Moderators: Inventory,
Inferencing, and Applications. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[121]Richard D. Dubois, Rober J. Might. Neural Networks as Approach toward Producing Useful
Performance Moderator Functions (PMFs). Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[122]Eva Hudlicka, Jonathan Pfautz. Architecture and Representation Requirements for Modeling
Effects of Behavior Moderators. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[123]张德等. 组织行为学. 北京:清华大学出版社. 2000.10
[124]Rick Archer, Breet Walters, et al. Training as a performance Shaping Factor in Computer
Generated Forces. Proceeding of the 8th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1999
[125]Bower, G.H. How might emotions affect learning? In Christianson (ed), Handbook of
emotion and memory. Erlbaum, 1992.
[126]Frederic D. McKenzie, Jean Catanzaro, Mikel D. Petty. A Personality-Based Command
Decision-Maker: Results and Recommendations. Proceeding of the 10th Conference on
Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[127]Robert A. Van Houten. The Big Five as Basis for Modeling Personality. Proceeding of the
12th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2003
[128]Hogan, R., J. Hogan.Hogan Personality Inventory Manual. Tulsa, OK: Hogan Assessment
Systems, Inc. 1992
[129]Sloman. Personalities for synthetic actors: Current issues and some perspectives. In
Synthetic Actors: Towards Autonomous Personality Agents, R. Trappl and P. Petta, eds. New
York, NY: Springer.1997
118
[130]Aube. Sentini. Emotions as commitments operators: A foundation for control structure in
multi-agent systems. In Agents Breaking Away, W. Van de Velde and J.W. Perram, eds. New
York, NY: Springer-Verlag. 1996
[131]Moffat. Personality parameters and programs. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Berlin,
Germany: Springer-Verlag.1997
[132]Cesta, Miceli, Rizzo. Effects of different interaction attitudes on a multi-agent system
performance. In Agents Breaking Away, W. Van de Velde and J.W. Perram, eds. New York,
NY: Springer-Verlag.1996
[133]Hofstede. Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. 1980
[134]Michael Johns, Barry G. Silverman. How Emotions and Personality Affect the Utility of
Alternative Decisions: A Terrorist Target Selection Case Study.
[135]Gratch Jonathan, Marsella Stacy. Modeling the influence of emotion on belief for virtual
training simulations. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[136]Gregory P. Lannon, Helen Altman Klein, Donald H. Timian. Integrating Cultural Factors
into Threat Conceptual Models. Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[137]Hofstede.Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage Publications.1980
[138]Helmreich, Merritt, Sherman. Human factors and national culture. ICAO Journal, 1996
51(8):14-16.
[139]Michael Johns, Barry G. Silverman. How Emotions and Personality Effect the Utility of
Alternative Decisions: A Terrorist Target Selection Case Study. How Emotions and
Personality Effect the Utility of Alternative Decisions
[140]Martin D. Buhmann. Radial Basis Functions: Theory and Implementations. New York:
Cambridge University Press. July 2003
[141]周彦,戴建伟. HLA 仿真程序设计. 北京:电子工业出版社. 2002.6
[142]周彦. 指挥自动化系统体系对抗仿真研究[博士学位论文]. 通信指挥学院. 2003.5
[143]N. R. Jennings. An agent-based approach for building complex software systems. Comms.
Of the ACM. 2001,44(4): 35-41
[144]D. Kinny, M.Georgeff, A. Rao. A methodology and Modeling Technique for Systems of BDI
119
Agents. In: Agents Breaking Away (MAAMAW’96), LNAI 1038. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
Germany. 1996: 56-71
[145]M. Wooldridge, P. Ciancarini. Agent-Oriented Software Engineering: The State of the Art.
Lecture Notes in AI, Volume 1957, Springer-Verlag. January 2001
[146]Jeffrey R. Cares. The Use of Agent-Based Models in Military Concept Development.
Proceedings of the 2002 Winter Simulation Conference
[147]B. C. Horling. A Reusable Component Architecture for Agent Construction. Dep. Of
Computer Science, University of Massachusetts UMass. Technical Report 1998-49 [online].
Available http://mas.cs.umass.edu/~bhorling/papers/1998-49/agent.html
[148]F. M. T. Brazier, C. M. Jonker, J. Treur. Principles of Component-Based Design of Intelligent
Agents. Data and Knowledge Engineering. 2002
[149]C. Heinze, M. Papasimeon, S. Goss. Specifying Agent Behavior with Use Cases. In: C.
Zhang, V. W. Soo eds. Third Pacific Rim International Workshop On Muti-Agents (PRIMA-
99). Melbourne, Australia. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. August 200: 128-142
[150]王江云,王行仁,彭晓源. 空战仿真系统中行为决策模型的设计与实现. 系统仿真学报,
2001.3(13):135-138
[151]Drisha Kavi, David C. Kung, Hitesh Bhambhani. Extending UML for Modeling and Design
of Multi-Agent Systems [online]. Available http://salid6.csci.unt.edu/~kavi/Research/
selmas2.pdf
[152]J. Odell, V. D. Parunak, B. Bauer. Extending UML for Agents. In: Proc of the Agent-
Oriented Information Systems (AOIS) Workshop at the 17th National conference on Article
Intelligence (AAAI), 2000
[153]John W. Shockley, Kirk Parsons, Mark Morgenthaler. Developing an HLA Virtual Command
Post. Simulation. Nov, 1999
Military Simulations. National Academic Press, Washington, D.C. 1998
[2] Richard W. Pew and Anne S. Mavor. Representation Human Behavior in Military
Simulations: Iterim Report (1997)
[3] 胡晓峰. 美军训练模拟. 北京:国防大学出版社. 2001.3
[4] Tom Hughes. Human Behavioral Representation Requirements for Integrated Air Defense
System. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[5] 龚光红. DIS 环境下的计算机生成兵力研究[博士学位论文]. 北京航空航天大学. 1997.3.
[6] Amy E. Henninger, Avelino J. Gonzalez. Modeling Semi-Automated Forces with Neural
Networks: Performance Improvement through a Modular Approach. Proceeding of the 11th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 2002
[7] http://www.ist.ucf.edu/labsproj/projects/isf.htm
[8] Randolph Jones, Eric Chown. Interfacing Emotional Behavior Moderators with Intelligent
Synthetic Forces. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[9] Douglas Reece, Derrick Franceschini, Steven Hursh. ModSAF as a Model of Cognition.
Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[10] Anthony Courtemanche, Rob Wittman. OneSAF: A Product Line Approach for a
Next-Generation CGF. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces
and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[11] Soar/IFOR Documentation. http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/ifor/
[12] Susie M. Hartzog, Marnie R. Salisbury. Command Forces (CFOR) Program Status Report.
Proceeding of the 6th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, July, 1996
[13] 王昌金, 龚光红, 王行仁. 计算机生成兵力. 北京航空航天大学学报(控制与仿真专辑).
Vol. 25 No. 3 1999.
[14] 刘秀罗. CGF 建模相关技术及其在指挥控制建模中的应用研究[博士学位论文]. 国防科
110
技大学. 2001.10
[15] 刘秀罗,黄柯逮. 有限状态机在 CGF 行为建模中的应用. 系统仿真学报. 2001.9
[16] 刘秀罗.数学化仿真世界:CGF 行为建模问题. 计算机世界,2001.5
[17] 杨立功,郭齐胜. 计算机生成兵力的研究进展. 计算机仿真,Vol. 17, No. 3, 2000.5
[18] 周秉锋. UML 软件建模. 北京:北京大学出版社. 2001 年 11
[19] 行为建模技术. www.buct.edu.cn/mech/html/act_model.htm
[20] 防火墙封阻应用攻击技术综述. http://www.tele21.com.cn/jiaoliu/show.asp?classid=835
[21] 涂晓媛,陈弘娟,涂序彦.“人工鱼”及虚拟海底世界建模方案. http://www.swm.com.cn/rj/
2000-4/20000414.html
[22] Edward D, Taylor C, Sneld D J. Artificial Intelligence in Command and control. Signal, 1998
[23] Lucia Falzon, Mike Davies. Behavioral Representation Challenges in Theatre-Level Planning
Support. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[24] Jose B.Cruz, Jr., Marwan A. Simaan, Aca Gacic, Huihui Jiang. Modeling and Control of
Military Operations against Adversarial Control. Proceedings of the 39th IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control, Sydney, Australia, December, 2000
[25] Scott Harmon. A Taxonomy of Human Behavior Representation Requirements. Proceeding of
the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2002
[26] Sheila B. Banks, Martin R. Stytz. Advancing the State of Human Behavior Representation for
Modeling and Simulation: Technologies and Techniques. Proceeding of the 9th Conference
on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[27] Lyle Bloom. Modeling Adaptive, Asymmetric Behaviors. Proceeding of the 12th Conference
on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2003
[28] Chris Forsythe, Patrick Xavier. Human Emulation: Progress Toward Realistic Synthetic
Human Agents. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[29] Evan Rolek, Tom Hughes. A Strategy for Defining Human Representation Requirements.
Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[30] S. Y. Harmon, Zetetix. A Theory for Representing Human Behavior in Simulation. Procee-
ding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation.
111
Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[31] N. R. Jennings, K. Sycara, M. Wooldridge. A Roadmap of Agent Research and Development.
Int. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. 1998,1(1): 7-338
[32] C. A. Iglesias, M. Garijo, J. C. Gonzalez. A survey of agent-Oriented methodologies. In:
Intelligent Agents V (LNAI vol. 1555), Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 1999
[33] Tom Hughes, Evan Rolek. Human Behavioral Representation Requirements for an Integrated
Air Defense System
[34] 史忠植. 智能主体及应用(第 1 版). 北京:科学出版社. 2000.12
[35] Silvia Coradeschi, Lars Karlsson, Anders Torne. Intelligent Agent for Aircraft Combat
Simulation [Online]. Available http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cache/papers/cs/2009/
[36] 王红卫. 建模与仿真. 北京:科学出版社. 2003.3
[37] Karen Harper, Stephen Ho, Greg Zacharias. Intelligent Hostile Urban Threat Agents for
MOUT Operations [online]. Available http://www.charlesriveranalytics.com/publications/
papers/IHUT%20Manuscript.pdf
[38] Peter Clark, Helen Pongracic, Arvind Chandran. Researching the Use of Agent-Based CGF in
Human-in-the Loop Simulation. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[39] Sui Qing, How Khee Yin, Darren Ong Wee Sze. An Intelligent Agent in an Air Combat
Domain. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[40] Robert J. Might, Richard D. Dubois. Conceptual Modeling of Human Behavior (CMHB).
Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[41] 章士嵘. 认知科学导论(第 1 版). 北京:人民出版社,1992.4
[42] 陈霖,朱滢,陈永明. 心理学与认知科学. 21 世纪初科学发展趋势(第 1 版). 北京:科学
出版社,1996.9.100-110
[43] Rao, Geogreff. Modeling rational agents with a BDI-architecture. Proceedings of the second
international conference on principles of KRR, Morgan Kaufmann, 1991
[44] Cohen P R, Levesque H J. Intension is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence,
1990.42
[45] Rao, Georgeff. Modeling agents within a BDI architecture. In Fikes and Sandewall eds., Proc.
Of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1991
112
[46] 姚莉,张维明. 智能协作信息技术. 北京:电子工业出版社. 2002.4
[47] Y. Shoham. Agent-oriented programming. Artificial Intelligence. 1993,60:51-92
[48] M. Wooldridge, N. R. Jennings. Intelligent Agents: Theory and Practice. The Knowledge
Engineering Review, 1995, 10(2): 115-152.
[49] Rao, Geogeff. BDI agents: From Theory to Practice. In: Proc. Of the 1st International Conf.
on Multi-agent Systems. San Francisco. AAAI Press, 1995
[50] Rao A S, Georgeff M P. An abstract architecture for rational agents. In: Proc. of the 3rd
international conference on principles of knowledge and reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann,
1992
[51] 曾伟. 基于 MAS 的系统组织建模与设计[博士学位论文]. 华中科技大学系统工程研究
所,2000
[52] 辞海编辑委员会. 辞海. 上海:上海辞书出版社. 1999.9
[53] 辞海编辑委员会. 辞海. 上海:上海辞书出版社. 1979.4
[54] 许宁宁. 行为科学百科全书. 北京 : 中国劳动出版社. 1992.1
[55] 联合 99 工程技术报告 [内部资料]
[56] Nils LaVine, Lee Napravnik, Steven Peters. An Advanced Software Architecture for
Behavioral Representation within Computer Generated Forces. Proceeding of the 11th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 2002
[57] Robert B. Calder, John Drummey. Definition of a Military Intelligent Agent Architecture.
Proceeding of the 8th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1999
[58] S. David Kwak, Lockheed Martin. A Multiple Paradigm Behavior Architecture: COREBA
(Cognition Oriented Emergent Behavior Architecture). 1998 Fall Simulation Interoperability
Workshop.
[59] David N. Back. Agent-Based Soldier Behavior in Dynamic 3D Virtual Environments.
[Doctoral Thesis]. NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL. March 2002
[60] Rosaldo J.F. Rossetti, Rafael H. Bordini, Ana L.C. Bazzan. Using BDI Agents to Improve
Driver Modeling in a Commuter Scenario. Transportation Research Part C, 2002,10:373-379
[61] Karen A. Harper, Nick Ton, Kirby Jacobs, et al. Graphical Agent Development Environment
for Human Behavior Representation. Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
113
[62] Jared Freeman, Frederick J. Diedrich, Craig Haimson. Behavioral Representations for
Training Tactical Communication Skills. Proceeding of the 12th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2003
[63] Scott H. Smith. CAML: A Cognition and Action Modeling Language. Proceeding of the 7th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 1998
[64] 郑义,李思昆,胡成军等. 虚拟实体对象的建模方法研究. 国防科学技术大学学报,Vol.
20, No.1, 1998
[65] 郑义,李思昆,曾亮. 虚拟战场实体行为建模技术. 计算机应用,Vol. 20, Supp1, 2000.8
[66] 庞国峰,郝爱民,梁晓辉. 一种计算机生成兵力系统自治实体行为描述原语. 系统仿真
学报,Vol. 12, No. 4, 2000.7
[67] Cagatay Undeger, Veysi Isler, Ziya Ipekkan. An Intelligent Action Algorithm for Virtual
Human Agents. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[68] Andy Ceranowicz, Paul E. Nielsen, Frank V. Koss. Behavioral Representation In JSAF.
Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[69] Jonathan Gratch. Task-decomposition Planning for Command Decision Making. Proceeding
of the 6th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation.
Orlando, Florida, May, 1996
[70] Thomas R. Ioerger, Richard A. Volz. Modeling Cooperative, Reactive Behaviors on the
Battlefield with Intelligent Agents. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
[71] 陆汝钤. 人工智能(上、下册). 北京:科学出版社,1996
[72] Robert A. Wilson, Frank C. Keil. The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. London:
MIT Press. 1999
[73] John Funge. Cognitive Modeling for Computer Generated Forces. Proceeding of the 8th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 1999
[74] Brian J. Dubas, Gary L. Waag. OPFOR Perception of the Battlespace (OPB): Challenges for
Intelligence Community Support to Military Training Simulations. 1999 Fall Simulation
Interoperability Workshop.
114
[75] Joseph Psotka, Technologies for Representing Cognition and Emotion in CGF. 1999 Summer
Simulation Interoperability Workshop.
[76] Randall W. Hill. Modeling Perceptual Attention in Virtual Humans. Proceeding of the 8th
Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida,
May, 1999
[77] Glen G. Roussos. A Method of Implementing Entity Detections in the DIS Environment for
Use in Analysis. 15th Distributed Interactive Simulation Workshop
[78] Hemant K. Bhargava, William C. Branley. What would Ajax Have Observed? Or, Introducing
Imperfections in the Belief Systems of Autonomous Agents. Proceedings of the Twenty-
Sixth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. January 1993.
[79] 岳超源. 决策理论与方法. 北京:科学出版社. 2003.3
[80] Catherine K. Murphy. Combing Belief Functions When Evidence Conflicts. Decision
Support Systems, Vol.29, 2000
[81] Jon Doyle. Constructive Belief and Rational Representation. Computational Intelligence,
Vol5, No.1(1989), pp. 1-11
[82] G. Shafer. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1976.
[83] Peter Aykroyd, Karen Harper, Charles Hennon. Cognitive Modeling of Individual Combatant
and Small Unit Decision-Making within the Integrated Unit Simulation System. Proceeding
of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation.
Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[84] James H. Hicinbothom. Maintaining Situation Awareness in Synthetic Team Members.
Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[85] Michael R. Oakes, Mark Checchio, et al. Improved Situation Awareness and Combat Training
For USAF C2 Units. 2000 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop.
[86] Octavio Juarez-Espinosa, Cleotilde Gonzalez. MASA: Meta-Architecture for Situation
Awareness. Proceeding of the 12th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2003
[87] Ronald N. Taylor. Behavioral decision making. Glenview, IL : Scott, Foresman, 1984
[88] Mary S. Tamucci. Conceptual Modeling of Foreign Command Decision Processes. 2000
Spring Simulation Interaction Workshop
[89] Colin R. Mason, James Moffat. Representing the C2 Process in Simulations: Modeling the
115
Human Decision Making. Proceedings of the 2000 Winter Simulation Conference
[90] Christopher Barnes, Linda Elliott, Plamen Petrov, et al. Agent-based Simulation of Complex
C3 Decision-making: Issues and Opportunities. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on
Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[91] Joel Brynielsson. A Decision-Theoretic Framework Using Rational Agency. Proceeding of
the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2002
[92] Walter Warwick. Developing Computational Models of Recognition Primed Decisions:
Progress and Lessons Learned. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[93] Sven Koenig, Yaxin Liu. Simulating High-Stake Decisions. Proceeding of the 8th Conference
on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1999
[94] Rady Holbrook, Rich Souder, Michelle Rueda. Modeling of the Command and Staff Decision
Making Process-Software Requirement Analysis in WARSIM 2000
[95] Mehdi Dastani, Leendert van der Torre. Decisions and Games for BD Agents [online]. Avail-
able http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/dastani02decisions.html
[96] Ronen I. Brafman, Moshe Tennenholtz. Modeling Agents as Qualitative Decision Makers.
Artificial Intelligence, Vol94, 1997
[97] Weaver, R., Silverman, BG, et al., Modeling and Simulating Terrorist Decision-making, 10th
CGF Proceedings, 2001
[98] Sigrid Gustafson. Modeling the Terrorist Decisions of a Closed-Regime: An Illustrative
Methodology. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[99] Rob Alexander, Greg Schow. Course of Action Analysis for Corps and Division Level
Military Decision-Making. 1998 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop
[100]Dr. Stefan Krusche, Dr. Andreas Tolk, et al. Decision Support Tools II– Insights from a
German R&D Study. 2000 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop
[101]Rich Souder, Paul Walker, Ken Castner. Human Decision Making - Object Oriented Analysis
in WARSIM 2000
[102]Keith O. Hunter, William E. Hart, Chris Forsythe. A Naturalistic Decision Making Model for
Simulated Human Combatants. Proceeding of the 9th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2000
116
[103]冯俊文. 基于状态知识的决策分析方法. 系统工程与电子技术. Vol.22, No.2 2000
[104]李启明, 申立银. 风险管理中的风险效应-行为决策模型及分析. 系统工程理论与实践,
2001.10
[105] Tom M. Mitchell. Machine Learning. Beijing : China Machine Press, 2003
[106]Jinhua Zheng, Zhongzhi Shi. Autonomous Mental Development for Agent [online]. Availa
–ble http://www.cse.msu.edu/dl/SciencePaper.pdf
[107]Jalal Baghdadchi. A Learing Model for Intelligent Agents Based on Classifier Systems and
Approxiamte Reasoning. Proceedings of the 39th Conference on Decision and Control.
Sydney, Australia. December, 200
[108]Gregg Gunsch, David Mezera. On Applying Machine Learning to Develop Air Combat
Simulation Agents. 4th Annual Conference Artificial Intelligence, Simulation, and Planning
in High Autonomy Systems. Tucson, Arizona, September 20-22, 1993.
[109]Annie Wu, Hal Stringer. Learning using chunking in evolutionary algorithms. Proceeding of
the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2002
[110]Chris Gaskett, David Wettergreen, and Alexander Zelinsky: Reinforcement Learning
Applied to Control of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle, International Conference on
Field and Service Robotics, 1999. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
[111]Mark Humphrys: Action Selection Methods Using Reinforcement Learning, Thesis,
University of Cambridge, England, 1997
[112]Leslie Pack Kaelbing and Michael L. Littman: Reinforcement Learning: A Survey, Journal
of Artificial Intelligence Research 4 (1996) pp. 237-285
[113]赵卫东, 陈国华, 盛昭翰. 基于智能 Agent 的复合学习方法. 系统工程理论与实践,
2002.12
[114]齐润泉, 孙文星. 具有学习机制的软件 agent. 山东师大学报(自然科学版). Vol.16, No.2.
2001.6,
[115]李宁, 高阳. 一种基于强化学习的学习 Agent. 计算机研究与发展. Vol.38, No.9,2001.9
[116]Siegel, Wolf,Schorn. Human Performance in Continuous Operations: Description of a
Simulation Model and User’s Manual for Evaluation of Performance Degradation. ARI
Technical Report 505,AD-A101950. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and
Social Sciences,Alexandria, VA. January 1981
[117]Van Nostrand. Model Effectiveness as a Function of Personnel. CAA-SR-86-34. U.S. Army
117
Concepts Analysis Agency, Bethesda, MD.1986
[118]Davis,P.K. Modeling of Soft Factors in the RAND Strategy Assessment Center. P-7538.
Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.1989
[119]Fineberg. McClellan, Peters. Sensitizing synthetic forces to suppression on the virtual
battlefield.Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral
Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1996
[120]Eva Hudlicka, Greg Zacharias. Individual and Group Behavior Moderators: Inventory,
Inferencing, and Applications. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[121]Richard D. Dubois, Rober J. Might. Neural Networks as Approach toward Producing Useful
Performance Moderator Functions (PMFs). Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer
Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[122]Eva Hudlicka, Jonathan Pfautz. Architecture and Representation Requirements for Modeling
Effects of Behavior Moderators. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[123]张德等. 组织行为学. 北京:清华大学出版社. 2000.10
[124]Rick Archer, Breet Walters, et al. Training as a performance Shaping Factor in Computer
Generated Forces. Proceeding of the 8th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 1999
[125]Bower, G.H. How might emotions affect learning? In Christianson (ed), Handbook of
emotion and memory. Erlbaum, 1992.
[126]Frederic D. McKenzie, Jean Catanzaro, Mikel D. Petty. A Personality-Based Command
Decision-Maker: Results and Recommendations. Proceeding of the 10th Conference on
Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[127]Robert A. Van Houten. The Big Five as Basis for Modeling Personality. Proceeding of the
12th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando,
Florida, May, 2003
[128]Hogan, R., J. Hogan.Hogan Personality Inventory Manual. Tulsa, OK: Hogan Assessment
Systems, Inc. 1992
[129]Sloman. Personalities for synthetic actors: Current issues and some perspectives. In
Synthetic Actors: Towards Autonomous Personality Agents, R. Trappl and P. Petta, eds. New
York, NY: Springer.1997
118
[130]Aube. Sentini. Emotions as commitments operators: A foundation for control structure in
multi-agent systems. In Agents Breaking Away, W. Van de Velde and J.W. Perram, eds. New
York, NY: Springer-Verlag. 1996
[131]Moffat. Personality parameters and programs. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Berlin,
Germany: Springer-Verlag.1997
[132]Cesta, Miceli, Rizzo. Effects of different interaction attitudes on a multi-agent system
performance. In Agents Breaking Away, W. Van de Velde and J.W. Perram, eds. New York,
NY: Springer-Verlag.1996
[133]Hofstede. Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. 1980
[134]Michael Johns, Barry G. Silverman. How Emotions and Personality Affect the Utility of
Alternative Decisions: A Terrorist Target Selection Case Study.
[135]Gratch Jonathan, Marsella Stacy. Modeling the influence of emotion on belief for virtual
training simulations. Proceeding of the 11th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and
Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2002
[136]Gregory P. Lannon, Helen Altman Klein, Donald H. Timian. Integrating Cultural Factors
into Threat Conceptual Models. Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Computer Generated
Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, Florida, May, 2001
[137]Hofstede.Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage Publications.1980
[138]Helmreich, Merritt, Sherman. Human factors and national culture. ICAO Journal, 1996
51(8):14-16.
[139]Michael Johns, Barry G. Silverman. How Emotions and Personality Effect the Utility of
Alternative Decisions: A Terrorist Target Selection Case Study. How Emotions and
Personality Effect the Utility of Alternative Decisions
[140]Martin D. Buhmann. Radial Basis Functions: Theory and Implementations. New York:
Cambridge University Press. July 2003
[141]周彦,戴建伟. HLA 仿真程序设计. 北京:电子工业出版社. 2002.6
[142]周彦. 指挥自动化系统体系对抗仿真研究[博士学位论文]. 通信指挥学院. 2003.5
[143]N. R. Jennings. An agent-based approach for building complex software systems. Comms.
Of the ACM. 2001,44(4): 35-41
[144]D. Kinny, M.Georgeff, A. Rao. A methodology and Modeling Technique for Systems of BDI
119
Agents. In: Agents Breaking Away (MAAMAW’96), LNAI 1038. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
Germany. 1996: 56-71
[145]M. Wooldridge, P. Ciancarini. Agent-Oriented Software Engineering: The State of the Art.
Lecture Notes in AI, Volume 1957, Springer-Verlag. January 2001
[146]Jeffrey R. Cares. The Use of Agent-Based Models in Military Concept Development.
Proceedings of the 2002 Winter Simulation Conference
[147]B. C. Horling. A Reusable Component Architecture for Agent Construction. Dep. Of
Computer Science, University of Massachusetts UMass. Technical Report 1998-49 [online].
Available http://mas.cs.umass.edu/~bhorling/papers/1998-49/agent.html
[148]F. M. T. Brazier, C. M. Jonker, J. Treur. Principles of Component-Based Design of Intelligent
Agents. Data and Knowledge Engineering. 2002
[149]C. Heinze, M. Papasimeon, S. Goss. Specifying Agent Behavior with Use Cases. In: C.
Zhang, V. W. Soo eds. Third Pacific Rim International Workshop On Muti-Agents (PRIMA-
99). Melbourne, Australia. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. August 200: 128-142
[150]王江云,王行仁,彭晓源. 空战仿真系统中行为决策模型的设计与实现. 系统仿真学报,
2001.3(13):135-138
[151]Drisha Kavi, David C. Kung, Hitesh Bhambhani. Extending UML for Modeling and Design
of Multi-Agent Systems [online]. Available http://salid6.csci.unt.edu/~kavi/Research/
selmas2.pdf
[152]J. Odell, V. D. Parunak, B. Bauer. Extending UML for Agents. In: Proc of the Agent-
Oriented Information Systems (AOIS) Workshop at the 17th National conference on Article
Intelligence (AAAI), 2000
[153]John W. Shockley, Kirk Parsons, Mark Morgenthaler. Developing an HLA Virtual Command
Post. Simulation. Nov, 1999