Context-based reasoning is a paradigm for modeling agent behavior that is based on the idea that humans only use a small portion of their knowledge at any given time. It was specially designed to represent human tactical behavior and has been successfully implemented in systems with single agents or two agents working together. In this paper, we apply this idea in a hierarchical multi-agent system of command agents, where the agents’ actions are to command and coordinate subordinates, send reports to their superiors, and communicate with other agents at the same level. We focus on how contexts and actions can be defined for these higher level command agents and how the contexts and actions for the different command agents are related. The proposed methodology is implemented and tested for a hierarchy of command agents that are interpreting and planning an operational order at a battalion level and carrying it out in a computer generated forces environment.
BuilderCHBankesSCNordinR. Command concepts: A theory derived from the practice of command and control. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1999.
2.
GonzalezAJ. Tactical reasoning through context-based reasoning. In: Context in computing: A cross-disciplinary approach for modeling the real world. New York: Springer New York, 2014, pp.491–508.
3.
GonzalezFGGrejsPGonzalezAJ. Autonomous automobile behavior through context-based reasoning. In: Proceedings of the international Florida artificial intelligent research society conference, 2000.
4.
BrownJC. Application and evaluation of the context-based reasoning paradigm. Master’s Thesis, University of Central Florida, Orlando, USA, 1994.
5.
GrejsPF. Autonomous automobile behavior through a context-based approach. Master’s Thesis, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando, USA, 1998.
6.
PatzBJPapelisYPillatR. A practical approach to robotic design for the DARPA urban challenge. J Field Robot2008; 25: 528–566.
7.
GonzalezAJAhlersRH. Concise representation of autonomous intelligent platforms in a simulation through the use of scripts. In: Proceedings of the sixth annual FLAIRS conference, 1993.
8.
GonzalezAJAhlersR. Context-based representation of intelligent behavior in training simulations. Trans. Soc. Comput. Simul. Int.; 15: 153–166.
9.
GumusIGonzalezAJ. A threat ranking algorithm for multiple intelligent entities in a simulated environment. In: Proceedings of the Florida artificial intelligence research society conference, 1999.
10.
ProenzaR. A framework for multiple agents and memory recall within the context-based paradigm. Master’s Thesis, University of Central Florida, USA, 1997.
11.
HuZtLiuJ. The research of ASW helicopter ACGF construction based on CxBR. In: Proceedings of the international conference on computational intelligence and security workshops.
12.
FazendaPCarreiraPLimaP. Context-based reasoning in smart buildings. In: Proceedings of the first international workshop on information technology for energy applications, vol.923, 2012, pp.855–874.
13.
NorlanderL. A framework for efficient implementation of context-based reasoning in intelligent simulations. Master’s Thesis, University of Central Florida, USA, 1999.
14.
DeveroLGonzalezAJ. Collaborative teamwork representation in context-based reasoning. In: Proceedings of the 2001 computer generated forces and behavior representation conference, 2001.
15.
BarrettGAGonzalezAJ. Effective agent collaboration through improved communication by means of contextual reasoning. Int J Intell Syst2011; 26: 129–157.
16.
GramaCGonzalezAJPollakE. Automated plan generation for mid-echelons in the military decision-making process. In: Proceedings of the spring simulation interoperability workshop, 1998.
17.
FernlundHKGonzalezAJGeorgiopoulosM. Learning tactical human behavior through observation of human performance. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern2006; 36: 128–40.
18.
StensrudBSGonzalezAJ. Discovery of high-level behavior from observation of human performance in a strategic game. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern2008; 38: 855–874.
19.
TrinhVCGonzalezAJ. Discovering contexts from observed human performance. IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst2013; 43: 359–370.
20.
JohnsonCLGonzalezAJ. Learning collaborative team behavior from observation. Expert Syst Appl2014; 41: 2316–2328.
21.
SteinGGonzalezAJ. Learning in context: Enhancing machine learning with context-based reasoning. Appl Intell2014; 41: 709–724.
22.
WooldridgeM. An introduction to multiagent systems. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2002.
23.
RusselSNorvigP. Artificial Intelligence – a modern approach. 3rd ed.Prentice Hall, 2010.
24.
BrézillonPPomerolJC. Context in artificial intelligence: I. A survey of the literature. Comput Artif Intell1999; 18: 1–34.
25.
TurnerRM. Context-mediated behavior for intelligent agents. Int J Hum Comput Stud1998; 48: 307–330.
GonzalezAJStensrudBSBarretG. Formalizing context-based reasoning: A modeling paradigm for representing tactical human behavior. Int J Intell Syst2008; 23: 822–847.
28.
GonzalezAJTsurutaSSakuraiY. Using contexts to supervise a collaborative process. AI EDAM2010; 25(1): 25–40.
29.
Headquarters department of the army. Field manual no. 5-0, the operations process, fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm5-0.pdf (2010, accessed April 3rd 2017).
30.
CareySAKleinerMSHiebM. Standardizing battle management language – a vital move towards the army transformation. In: Proceedings of the 2001 fall simulation interoperability workshop, 01F-SIW-067, 2001.
31.
NATO. Modelling and simuation group 085: Standardization for C2-simulation interoperation. Report no. NMSG-085, 2014.
32.
HyndoyJIMevassvikOMBrathenK. Simulation in support of course of action development in operations. In: Proceedings of the interservice/industry training, simulation, and education conference (I/ITSEC), Orlando, FL, December 1–4 2014, pp.1844–1854.
33.
PokahrABraubachLLamersdorfW. Jadex: A BDI reasoning engine. In: Multi-agent programming – languages, platforms and applications, multiagent systems, artificial societies, and simulated organizations, vol.15, ch.6. Berlin: Springer, 2005, pp.149–174.
34.
LøvlidRAAlstadAMevassvikOM. Two approaches to developing a multi-agent system for battle command simulation. In: Proceedings of the 2013 winter simulation conference (WSC 2013), Washington, DC, USA, December 8th–11 2013 pp.1491–1502.
35.
SalisburyMRBrookerLBSeidelDW. Implementation of command forces (CFOR) simulation. In: Proceedings of the 5th workshop on computer generated forces and behavior representation, Florida, FL, USA1995, pp. 423–430.
36.
HillRWGratchJRosenbloomPS. Flexible group behavior: Lessons learned building virtual commanders. In: Proceedings of the 9th conference on computer generated forces and behavior representation, Florida, FL, USA, 2000.
37.
LairdJE. The soar cognitive architecture. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2012.
38.
MasonCRMoffatJ. An agent architecture for implementing command and control in military simulations. In Proceedings of the 2001 winter simulation conference (WSC 2001), Arlington, VA, 9–12 December 2001, pp.721–729.
39.
MasonCRMoffatJ. Representing the C2 process in simulations: Modelling the human decison-maker. In: Proceedings of the 2000 winter simulation conference (WSC 2000), 10–13, December 2000, Orlando, Florida, pp.940–949.
