Advertisement

Artificial Intelligence for Dramatic Performance

  • Rossana DamianoEmail author
  • Vincenzo Lombardo
  • Giulia Monticone
  • Antonio Pizzo
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11946)

Abstract

In the last years, digital media have challenged traditional narrative models with an increasing request for interaction with the user, leading to novel paradigms of storytelling and performance. While most research in interactive storytelling and drama has addressed the role of automation in the story generation process, in this paper we present a framework that relies on Artificial Intelligence techniques to augment the performer–audience interaction in a storytelling setting. Step after step, the emotional response of the audience is automatically detected, the performer decides about her/his attitude towards the audience, and the story is composed and delivered to the audience by the joint systemperformer initiative on an augmented stage. Initially designed as training tool for interactive story editing, the system has been deployed to create a public performance in February 2019.

Keywords

Interactive drama Emotion recognition Computational models of narrative 

References

  1. 1.
    Alrutz, M., Listengarten, J., Wood, M.V.D.: Playing with Theory in Theatre Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, London (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aylett, R., Louchart, S.: I contain multitudes: creativity and emergent narrative. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Creativity & Cognition, pp. 337–340. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aylett, R.S., Louchart, S., Dias, J., Paiva, A., Vala, M.: FearNot! – an experiment in emergent narrative. In: Panayiotopoulos, T., Gratch, J., Aylett, R., Ballin, D., Olivier, P., Rist, T. (eds.) IVA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3661, pp. 305–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11550617_26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bänziger, T., Scherer, K.R.: Introducing the Geneva multimodal emotion portrayal (gemep) corpus. In: Blueprint for Affective Computing, pp. 271–294 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Battaglino, C., Damiano, R., Lesmo, L.: Emotional range in value-sensitive deliberation. In: AAMAS International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, IFAAMAS, vol. 2, pp. 769–776 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baumer, A., Magerko, B.: Narrative development in improvisational theatre. In: Iurgel, I.A., Zagalo, N., Petta, P. (eds.) ICIDS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5915, pp. 140–151. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10643-9_19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benford, S., Greenhalgh, C., Giannachi, G., Walker, B., Marshall, J., Rodden, T.: Uncomfortable interactions. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2005–2014. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benford, S., et al.: Discomfort—the dark side of fun. In: Blythe, M., Monk, A. (eds.) Funology 2. HIS, pp. 209–224. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68213-6_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Borowski, M., Sugiera, M.: Worlds in Words: Storytelling in Contemporary Theatre and Playwriting. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Damiano, R., Lombardo, V., Pizzo, A.: DoppioGioco. Playing with the audience in an interactive storytelling platform. In: Barolli, L., Terzo, O. (eds.) CISIS 2017. AISC, vol. 611, pp. 287–298. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61566-0_27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damiano, R., Lombardo, V., Pizzo, A.: Thinning the fourth wall with intelligent prompt. In: Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V. (eds.) ICIDS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10690, pp. 206–218. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71027-3_17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foreman-Wernet, L., Dervin, B.: In the context of their lives: how audience members make sense of performing arts experiences. In: The Audience Experience: A Critical Analysis of Audiences in The Performing Arts, pp. 67–82. Chicago: Intellect (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giardina, M., et al.: Conveying audience emotions through humanoid robot gestures to an orchestra during a live musical exhibition. In: Barolli, L., Terzo, O. (eds.) CISIS 2017. AISC, vol. 611, pp. 249–261. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61566-0_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Latulipe, C., Carroll, E.A., Lottridge, D.: Love, hate, arousal and engagement: exploring audience responses to performing arts. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1845–1854. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li, B., Lee-Urban, S., Johnston, G., Riedl, M.: Story generation with crowdsourced plot graphs. In: AAAI (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Louchart, S., Truesdale, J., Suttie, N., Aylett, R.: Emergent narrative: past, present and future of an interactive storytelling approach. In: Interactive Digital Narrative. History, Theory and Practice, pp. 185–199. Routledge (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marranca, B.: Performance as design: the mediaturgy of john jesurun’s firefall. PAJ: J. Perform. Art 32(3), 16–24 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mateas, M., Stern, A.: Façade: an experiment in building a fully-realized interactive drama. In: Game Developers Conference, vol. 2 (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pizzo, A., Lombardo, V., Damiano, R.: Algorithms and interoperability between drama and artificial intelligence. Drama Rev. 63(4), 14–32 (2019)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Plutchik, R.: Emotion: A psychoevolutionary synthesis. Harpercollins College Division (1980)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Riedl, M.O., Young, R.M.: Narrative planning: balancing plot and character. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 39(1), 217–268 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roseman, I.J.: Appraisal in the emotion system: coherence in strategies for coping. Emot. Rev. 5(2), 141–149 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Russell, J.A.: Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychol. Rev. 110(1), 145 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Scherer, K.R.: Appraisal Theory. Handbook of Cognition and Emotion, pp. 637–663 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Silvia, P.J.: Looking past pleasure: anger, confusion, disgust, pride, surprise, and other unusual aesthetic emotions. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 3(1), 48 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stevens, C., Glass, R., Schubert, E., Chen, J., Winskel, H.: Methods for measuring audience reactions. In: Proceedings of the Inaugural International Conference on Music Communication Science, p. 155. HCSNet (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Swartjes, I., Theune, M.: An experiment in improvised interactive drama. In: Nijholt, A., Reidsma, D., Hondorp, H. (eds.) INTETAIN 2009. LNICST, vol. 9, pp. 234–239. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02315-6_25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tanenbaum, J.: How i learned to stop worrying and love the gamer: reframing subversive play in story-based games. In: Proceedings of DiGRA (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tschacher, W., Greenwood, S., Kirchberg, V., Wintzerith, S., van den Berg, K., Tröndle, M.: Physiological correlates of aesthetic perception of artworks in a museum. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 6(1), 96 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Weallans, A., Louchart, S., Aylett, R.: Distributed drama management: beyond double appraisal in emergent narrative. In: Interactive Storytelling, pp. 132–143 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rossana Damiano
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Vincenzo Lombardo
    • 1
    • 3
  • Giulia Monticone
    • 1
  • Antonio Pizzo
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità di TorinoTurinItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Studi UmanisticiUniversità di TorinoTurinItaly
  3. 3.CIRMA Interdepartmental Center of Research on Multimedia and AudiovisualTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations