Virtual Humans Forum
Virtual Humans Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Virtual Humans
Partner website:
Chatbots.org
 All Forums
 Virtual Humans
 Software Download - Tips and Tricks
 A sense of humor
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

thenar
Curious Member



USA
69 Posts

Posted - Dec 18 2005 :  18:45:01  Show Profile  Visit thenar's Homepage
And Vittorio, thank you for the English lesson, I only knew two of them!

-P-
Go to Top of Page

laackejim
Committed Member



USA
3274 Posts

Posted - Dec 19 2005 :  10:10:24  Show Profile
I looked for some, but those on my list all seem to be in some kind of institution or other

JIm
quote:
Originally posted by GrantNZ


There are some far better qualified people around here than myself!


Uncle Jim (e=mc2)
Go to Top of Page

laackejim
Committed Member



USA
3274 Posts

Posted - Dec 19 2005 :  10:16:19  Show Profile
Dear Holoman,

I have something much more complicated than that in mind for Peter. I am going to ask him to send a little bitty note to the class, to be included in the copy of each Virtual Human book that Me Myself and I are going to buy at RETAIL to give them . I don't want to get too complicated so I won't even ask for a signature , just an email sent to the School District.

Jim

PS you are already on the list of judges, don't you remember?

quote:
Originally posted by hologenicman



I nominate Peter!

John L>


Uncle Jim (e=mc2)
Go to Top of Page

hologenicman
Moderator



USA
3324 Posts

Posted - Dec 19 2005 :  10:26:51  Show Profile  Visit hologenicman's Homepage
Just like my Air Force days... If you don't speak up, someone "volunteers" you.

It'll be fun, so long as the students don't take us too seriously. It's good for students to know that the only difference between them and us is usually based on the date of birth.

John L>

HologenicMan
John A. Latimer
http://www.UniversalHologenics.com

"If the Human brain were so simple that we could understand it,
we would be so simple that we couldn't..."
-Emerson M Pugh-

Current project:http://www.vrconsulting.it/vhf/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=816&whichpage=1

DISCOVERY: The more I learn, the more I learn how little I know.
GOAL: There's strength in simplicity.
NOTE: Goal not always achieved.
Go to Top of Page

laackejim
Committed Member



USA
3274 Posts

Posted - Dec 20 2005 :  07:58:23  Show Profile
Oh, before I am done they will surely know that, They will also know that the birthdate difference not only means that we have had the chance to do things, it also means we have had the chance to do them wrong, sometimes over and over.

Thanks John.

There is something about your (and grant's) work that is niggleing at my head. I have learned to respect those niggles over the years. At this time I don't know whether the niggle is "somethings wrong", or "something is REALLY right" I just have to dig and try it out, at least on paper and in my head. Since I usually get the niggle straight quickly -- if it is really "somethings wrong" -- I suspect you got something really good going. there is something inherent in what you have done that is very valuable. I just don't know what it is yet. (now doesn't that sound like a real doofus and I am actually trying to be very serious.

quote:
Originally posted by hologenicman

Just like my Air Force days... If you don't speak up, someone "volunteers" you.

It'll be fun, so long as the students don't take us too seriously. It's good for students to know that the only difference between them and us is usually based on the date of birth.

John L>


Uncle Jim (e=mc2)
Go to Top of Page

hologenicman
Moderator



USA
3324 Posts

Posted - Dec 20 2005 :  09:10:18  Show Profile  Visit hologenicman's Homepage
quote:
There is something about your (and grant's) work that is niggleing at my head. I have learned to respect those niggles over the years. At this time I don't know whether the niggle is "somethings wrong", or "something is REALLY right" I just have to dig and try it out, at least on paper and in my head. Since I usually get the niggle straight quickly -- if it is really "somethings wrong" -- I suspect you got something really good going. there is something inherent in what you have done that is very valuable. I just don't know what it is yet.

That's why I like this forum.

btw, you are wise to trust you "niggles". It's kinda like dreaming; there's a greater consciousness that we tap into. It's too complex for our feeble psychis to comprehend so we disguise the info into things that we can relate to(hence architypes and "niggles")

I'm hoping that it is something really good since it is my experience that the sum is greater than it's parts. That applies to our coding as well as to our interactions.

John L>

HologenicMan
John A. Latimer
http://www.UniversalHologenics.com

"If the Human brain were so simple that we could understand it,
we would be so simple that we couldn't..."
-Emerson M Pugh-

Current project:http://www.vrconsulting.it/vhf/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=816&whichpage=1

DISCOVERY: The more I learn, the more I learn how little I know.
GOAL: There's strength in simplicity.
NOTE: Goal not always achieved.
Go to Top of Page

laackejim
Committed Member



USA
3274 Posts

Posted - Dec 20 2005 :  19:55:37  Show Profile
I GOT IT. oops thats shouting sorry.

1 never design a complex system based on the engineering that someone has already done, it is way too limiting.

2 a 9 dimensional input is just too uncontrollably complex for me at least.

3 a data technique used in soil science (introductory level for all students) is the ternary diagram which takes three variables and expresses them in a two dimensional relationship. this plotting produces (with a range of values) a two dimensional "cloud" of data space.

4 intensity of emotional content (the fourth dimension) can then be added to make a new 3 dimensional plot which can then be reduced to a two dimensional plot and increased again in the same way with an additional variable.

5 in this way each and every new dimension is orthogonal to the others. and the output can be used in the application (the sum of all inputs) as a three dimensional value

6 this is what the engineers need to produce the appropriate robotic expression mix.

7 produce the values, explain the implementation and make/let/challenge the engineer produce the machine to implement it.

If any of this makes sense or seems worth following I will work up some diagrams and explanations. Or at least I will try. I could just be halucinating.

JIm

quote:
Originally posted by hologenicman

[quote]
That's why I like this forum.

btw, you are wise to trust you "niggles". It's kinda like dreaming; there's a greater consciousness that we tap into. It's too complex for our feeble psychis to comprehend so we disguise the info into things that we can relate to(hence architypes and "niggles")

I'm hoping that it is something really good since it is my experience that the sum is greater than it's parts. That applies to our coding as well as to our interactions.

John L>


Uncle Jim (e=mc2)
Go to Top of Page

thenar
Curious Member



USA
69 Posts

Posted - Dec 20 2005 :  20:32:56  Show Profile  Visit thenar's Homepage
Jim,
With my 8 dimension emotional model I don't try to make all 8 dimensions orthogonal...not in the ususal sense. What I did was study studys on face expression of emotion. I then somewhat arbitrarily categorized 8 dimensions of emotion in this way...first I picked four that seemed to express positive values. Then I figured out emotions that would be their rough opposite. I made a continuum say Happy-----------Sad Bright--------Dull interested--------uninterested Accepting---------angry. etc. You'll not that some of these don't seem like opposites, but they worked from a 3D expression pov. I then had my artist create a set of morph targets...these are the extremes of each expression molded into a 3D face model. Actually they were sets of morph targets for different parts of the face. I had my programmers set up manual sliders at first for testing. I would have four sets of sliders. The software did what's called morph blending. That is as I slide the slider from interested to uninterested for example the face would go from very focused, looking at the speaker to very unfocused and you could attach behaviors like looking around and not paying attention. I found that I could have had many many more sliders, but these 4 created a very believable kind of face motion, IF and I say IF loudly, you restrected your slider movement to small moves in the center range. Incidently we also made the zero point in the center of the range and it was attached to a very neutral looking, blank face. by using small movements that might build in a direction depending on the emotional contexts of the incoming text, you could see the character's mood change. When we used big moves the faces started looking a little bizare like I feel the Haptek faces look most of the time. We need to avoid this. I belive this is part of why Haptek has had a hard time getting their faces generally accepted. I've told them this for years.

-P-
Go to Top of Page

hologenicman
Moderator



USA
3324 Posts

Posted - Dec 20 2005 :  21:35:25  Show Profile  Visit hologenicman's Homepage
quote:
2 a 9 dimensional input is just too uncontrollably complex for me at least.


Uh-Oh.I was actually just playing with either expanding the nine to twelve or twenty-seven depending on whether I added another dimension to the A,V,S address or I temporrally cascaded the prior two configs to give the input (in effect) the passage of time(which is required for life/consciousness to exist).

Call it a character flaw if you must, but I fully intend to push every piece of hardware and software to its limits. It is rare for me to find a computer that I don't eventually manage to bogg down with my degree of multitasking. You must understand that I don't accept today's technology as a limit for today's ideas. I was working with these same expectations back in '84 when the concepts were just not attainable with the hardware available at the time.

Nine dimensions is just a simple, organized beginning for my approach. My example has always been the human brain, and the more variables handled, the more realistic the emulation will be. Of course, I am quite aware that there is serious compression and abstraction in place with the human brain as in the optic nerve versus the retina, but that involves reducing billions of neurons down to millions for efficience. Millions still stacks up a bit higher than nine, twelve, twenty-seven, or even thirtey-six.

As for handling those inputs, there will later come a means of dealing with each one on a consistent manner that will interconnect them in a "simplified" fashion.

John L>

PS. Jim, I've decided to hold off on expanding my 9 inputs to 27 until AFTER I have a functioning product with the 9 first.

HologenicMan
John A. Latimer
http://www.UniversalHologenics.com

"If the Human brain were so simple that we could understand it,
we would be so simple that we couldn't..."
-Emerson M Pugh-

Current project:http://www.vrconsulting.it/vhf/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=816&whichpage=1

DISCOVERY: The more I learn, the more I learn how little I know.
GOAL: There's strength in simplicity.
NOTE: Goal not always achieved.

Edited by - hologenicman on Dec 20 2005 23:38:07
Go to Top of Page

hologenicman
Moderator



USA
3324 Posts

Posted - Dec 20 2005 :  22:27:51  Show Profile  Visit hologenicman's Homepage
quote:
3 a data technique used in soil science (introductory level for all students) is the ternary diagram which takes three variables and expresses them in a two dimensional relationship. this plotting produces (with a range of values) a two dimensional "cloud" of data space.


I was introduced to multidimensional(4+)clouds of sorts at an AI conference at Hill Air Force BAse back in '88 or so, and it has inspired much of my thinking since...

Ternary diagrams are something a bit different from that...

I found a really good tutorial for anyone interested at:

http://csmres.jmu.edu/geollab/Fichter/SedRx/readternary.html

My simple understand is that it is an excellent way of graphing three "mutually exclusive" values as a percentage of the whole. This will be very valuable for some of our endeavers, and I thank you, Jim, for sharing it with us. I don't actually believe that any of the variables that we are working with come in "mutually exclusive" threes though unless I am just missing it which is always a possibillity.

quote:
4 intensity of emotional content (the fourth dimension) can then be added to make a new 3 dimensional plot which can then be reduced to a two dimensional plot and increased again in the same way with an additional variable.

5 in this way each and every new dimension is orthogonal to the others. and the output can be used in the application (the sum of all inputs) as a three dimensional value

From what I gather, you are trying to "compress" the varibles(or more acurately, multiplex) for feeding into other systems such as association engines or robotics interfaces for expressions.

I'm sorry to say that I truly don't believe that ternary diagrams offer the multiplexing that you want them to. They do "visually" multiplex the data from three variables, but the variables still remain as three separate entities.

Another consideration is that any compression or multiplexing that is done must eventually be de-compressed or "Retroplexed???".

John L>

HologenicMan
John A. Latimer
http://www.UniversalHologenics.com

"If the Human brain were so simple that we could understand it,
we would be so simple that we couldn't..."
-Emerson M Pugh-

Current project:http://www.vrconsulting.it/vhf/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=816&whichpage=1

DISCOVERY: The more I learn, the more I learn how little I know.
GOAL: There's strength in simplicity.
NOTE: Goal not always achieved.
Go to Top of Page

GrantNZ
Dedicated Member



New Zealand
2677 Posts

Posted - Dec 21 2005 :  07:52:59  Show Profile
quote:
a 9 dimensional input is just too uncontrollably complex for me at least.


Can I add an exception? If nine dimensions is too complex, try instead designing three simple dimensions of three simple dimensions. The complexity is still there, but expressed in simple bites rather than a huge mouthful.

John's inputs at this stage are the perfect example of this, being exactly 3 x 3 - three levels times three types - two easy concepts that result in a whole heap of input

One key thing I've learnt from software development is "do lots of little simple bits" - simple things don't add together, they multiply.

quote:
I don't actually believe that any of the variables that we are working with come in "mutually exclusive" threes though


The three I've identified, and might code into Hal, are:
  • Fun
  • Enthusiasm
  • Chess


(That ought to have confused some people who didn't read the original thread on Zabaware!)

Edited by - GrantNZ on Dec 21 2005 07:53:24
Go to Top of Page

hologenicman
Moderator



USA
3324 Posts

Posted - Dec 21 2005 :  10:41:26  Show Profile  Visit hologenicman's Homepage
quote:
Fun
Enthusiasm
Chess


I thought the goal was to make these three mutually "inclusive".

John L>

HologenicMan
John A. Latimer
http://www.UniversalHologenics.com

"If the Human brain were so simple that we could understand it,
we would be so simple that we couldn't..."
-Emerson M Pugh-

Current project:http://www.vrconsulting.it/vhf/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=816&whichpage=1

DISCOVERY: The more I learn, the more I learn how little I know.
GOAL: There's strength in simplicity.
NOTE: Goal not always achieved.
Go to Top of Page

laackejim
Committed Member



USA
3274 Posts

Posted - Dec 22 2005 :  05:37:26  Show Profile
Peter,
My perspective was from the numerical defiition of various emotions, those definitions tied to input language, phrases, words, you know the stuff that users input but the VPerson has to interpret from just words. Blame my background of using data collected as numbers to predict decisions, at least if you are feeling charitable.

I am working on that end of the problem and will Probably continue. I say probably because your approach seems to be much more likely to be universally appropriate.

If I understand your comments correctly it would be relatively easy to work backward from your face (well not yours exactly but yours) to emotional ratings that could then be turned around from user input evaluations and responded to. It strikes me that someone looking at a properly emotionalized face could match phrases etc from a list, in relatively complex combinations and say that these are what I think that face is expressing. This idea somehow feels good. and would solve the obviously tedious and ambiguous job of assigning values to words and word combinations (which I am sad to say is what I have been working at).

Summary, Why didn't I think of that? Probably because I have little talent with faces.

I am familiar with morph targets and the importance of tiny changes in facial settings producing significant emotion on the face. That knowledge, gained from many hours of trying to make a face I could stand to look at, hasn't helped me one iota in creating something useful. Call me facially challenged (which sort of describes my own appearance come to think of it). I have been banging away with Poser 4,5,and6 as well as their body meshes exported to shade. (I really Have been banging my head against a semi-padded wall for a while) There are public domain free code male and female figures available now to begin manipulating.

Enough of this particular message. I have to print out your comments and then sit and bask in the pleasant feeling of a beautiful solution, even if it wasn't mine.

Jim

PS another message is forthcoming on a different but related idea.


quote:
Originally posted by thenar

Jim,What I did was study studys on face expression of emotion. I then somewhat arbitrarily categorized 8 dimensions of emotion in this way...first I picked four that seemed to express positive values. Then I figured out emotions that would be their rough opposite. I made a continuum say Happy-----------Sad Bright--------Dull interested--------uninterested Accepting---------angry. etc. You'll not that some of these don't seem like opposites, but they worked from a 3D expression pov.

That is as I slide the slider from interested to uninterested for example the face would go from very focused, looking at the speaker to very unfocused and you could attach behaviors like looking around and not paying attention. I found that I could have had many many more sliders, but these 4 created a very believable kind of face motion, IF and I say IF loudly, you restrected your slider movement to small moves in the center range. Incidently we also made the zero point in the center of the range and it was attached to a very neutral looking, blank face. by using small movements that might build in a direction depending on the emotional contexts of the incoming text, you could see the character's mood change.


Uncle Jim (e=mc2)
Go to Top of Page

laackejim
Committed Member



USA
3274 Posts

Posted - Dec 22 2005 :  05:44:01  Show Profile
You are right Grant. 9 is too much, I keep boiling things in my analyses (another world) into threes and then trying to accumulate them to nine, Hmmm thats three sets of three.

I am beginning to suspect that sometimes I am trying my darndest to impress you and the Holo one. I am just cynical enough to monitor my behavior and this is possible.

Oh well maybe I will grow out of it

Okay back to the drawing boards.

Jim

quote:
Originally posted by GrantNZ

quote:
a 9 dimensional input is just too uncontrollably complex for me at least.


Can I add an exception? If nine dimensions is too complex, try instead designing three simple dimensions of three simple dimensions. The complexity is still there, but expressed in simple bites rather than a huge mouthful.

John's inputs at this stage are the perfect example of this, being exactly 3 x 3 - three levels times three types - two easy concepts that result in a whole heap of input

One key thing I've learnt from software development is "do lots of little simple bits" - simple things don't add together, they multiply.

quote:
I don't actually believe that any of the variables that we are working with come in "mutually exclusive" threes though


The three I've identified, and might code into Hal, are:
  • Fun
  • Enthusiasm
  • Chess


(That ought to have confused some people who didn't read the original thread on Zabaware!)


Uncle Jim (e=mc2)
Go to Top of Page

rowboatics
Curious Member



49 Posts

Posted - Dec 16 2007 :  23:02:07  Show Profile
i totally understand humar
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Virtual Humans Forum © V.R.Consulting Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.26 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000