How do we decide how to represent an intelligent system in its interface, and how do we decide how the interface represents information about the world and about its own workings to a user? This article addresses these questions by examining the interaction between representation and intelligence in user interfaces. The rubric representation covers at least three topics in this context: (1) how a computational system is represented in its user interface, (2) how the interface conveys its representations of information and the world to human users, and (3) how the system's internal representation affects the human user's interaction with the system. I argue that each of these kinds of representation (of the system, information and the world, the interaction) is key to how users make the kind of attributions of intelligence that facilitate their interactions with intelligent systems. In this vein, it makes sense to represent a systmem as a human in those cases where social collaborative behavior is key and for the system to represent its knowledge to humans in multiple ways on multiple modalities. I demonstrate these claims by discussing issues of representation and intelligence in an embodied conversational agent -- an interface in which the system is represented as a person, information is conveyed to human users by multiple modalities such as voice and hand gestures, and the internal representation is modality independent and both propositional and nonpropositional.

The serve as a source of ideas for researchers agency.

Several regular programs will return is March 15, 2002.

Lifelike characters, or animated agents, provide a promising option for interface development because they allow us to draw on communication and interaction styles with which humans are already familiar. In this contribution, we revisit some of our past and ongoing projects to motivate an evolution of character-based presentation systems. This evolution starts from systems in which a character presents information content in the style of a TV presenter. It moves on with the introduction of presentation teams that convey information to the user by performing role plays. To explore new forms of active user involvement during a presentation, the next step can lead to systems that convey information in the style of interactive performances. From a technical point of view, this evaluation is mirrored in different approaches to determine the behavior of the employed characters. By means of concrete applications, we argue that a central planning component for automated agent scripting is not always a good choice, especially not in the case of interactive performances where the user might take on an active role as well.

Choosing an environment is an important decision for agent developers. A key issue in this decision is whether the environment will provide realistic problems for the agent to solve, in the sense that the problems are true to the issues that arise in addressing a particular research question. In addition to realism, other important issues include how tractable problems are that can be formulated in the environment, how easy agent performance can be measured, and whether the environment can be customized or extended for specific research questions. In the ideal environment, researchers can pose realistic but tractable problems to an agent, measure and evaluate its performance, and iteratively rework the environment to explore increasingly ambitious questions, all at a reasonable cost in time and effort. As might be expected, trade-offs dominate the suitability of an environment; however, we have found that the modern graphic user interface offers a good balance among these trade-offs. This article takes a brief tour of agent research in the user interface, showing how significant questions related to vision, planning, learning, cognition, and communication are currently being addressed.

The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence presented the 2000 Fall Symposium Series was held on Friday through Sunday, 3 to 5 November, at the Sea Crest Oceanfront Conference Center. The titles of the five symposia were (1) Building Dialogue Systems for Tutorial Applications, (2) Learning How to Do Things, (3) Parallel Cognition for Embodied Agents, (4) Simulating Human Agents, and (5) Socially Intelligent Agents: The Human in the Loop.

The long-term future of space exploration at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is dependent on the full exploitation of autonomous and adaptive systems, but mission managers are worried about the reliability of these more intelligent systems. The main focus of the workshop was to address these worries; hence, we invited NASA engineers working on autonomous and adaptive systems and researchers interested in the verification and validation of software systems. The dual purpose of the meeting was to (1) make NASA engineers aware of the verification and validation techniques they could be using and (2) make the verification and validation community aware of the complexity of the systems NASA is developing. The workshop was held 5 to 7 December 2000 at the Asilomar Conference Center in Pacific Grove, California.

The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, in cooperation with Stanford University's Department of Computer Science, presented the 2001 Spring Symposium Series on Monday through Wednesday, 26 to 28 March 2001, at Stanford University. The titles of the seven symposia were (1) Answer Set Programming: Toward Efficient and Scalable Knowledge, Representation and Reasoning, (2) Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Entertainment, (3) Game-Theoretic and Decision-Theoretic Agents, (4) Learning Grounded Representations, (5) Model-Based Validation of Intelligence, (6) Robotics and Education, and (7) Robust Autonomy.

The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence presented the 2000 Fall Symposium Series was held on Friday through Sunday, 3 to 5 November, at the Sea Crest Oceanfront Conference Center. The titles of the five symposia were (1) Building Dialogue Systems for Tutorial Applications, (2) Learning How to Do Things, (3) Parallel Cognition for Embodied Agents, (4) Simulating Human Agents, and (5) Socially Intelligent Agents: The Human in the Loop.

As the title indicates, Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence covers the design and development of multiagent and distributed AI systems. The purpose of this book is to provide a comprehensive overview of the field. It is an excellent collection of closely related papers that provides a wonderful introduction to multiagent systems and distributed AI.