AbstractThis paper presents model of social

interaction in multi-agent simulation on the basis

of the model of personality traits. The goal of this
study is to investigate behavioral movement in
architectural design simulation. Personality traits
used in this model influence behavioral movements
of the agents toward group formation. We modeled
force of attraction and force of repulsion as key
drivers for such purpose. The force of attraction
and the force of repulsion depend on the level of
Extraversion trait to represent the dynamic
characteristic of personal distance. The model of
intension for group formation is by means of social
interaction level which depends on Agreeableness
trait. Experiments showed implementation of these
models in multi agent simulation using basic
detection method on movement and direction. As
result, the personality traits-driven model can
provide heterogeneity and flexibility for social
interaction that demonstrate human behavioral
movements.
I. INTRODUCTION
he model of social interaction used in this study
refers to the correspondence of personality traits
with the probability to form a group formation. A
group formation means that at least two agents are
become approaching each other and stand together at
close range of distance at a given time.
Previous study of personality model [1], [2], [3]
noted that personality traits which are related for
social interaction is Agreeableness and Extraversion.
Agreeableness relates to the adjective attributes such
as kindness, affectionate and helpful whereas
Extraversion relates to energetic, talkative and
assertive kind of traits.
Model of the basic social interaction particularly on
how individual (agent) can form a group and
performing group behavior had become object study
of pedestrian dynamics [4], [5], [6], [7]. The social

Manuscript received September 9, 2011.

1
Aswin Indraprastha is with Building Technology Research
Group, Architectural Computation Lab. ITB, Indonesia (email:
aswinindra@ar.itb.ac.id, aswinindra@gmail.com)
force model is among few models that can describe
social interaction and social behavior among agents in
term of Newtonian forces of attraction and repulsion.
Another concept of the model of social interaction
comes from the study of its dynamic features [4], [5]
followed by study to synthesize internal dynamics
variables [8] with less elaboration on the personality
traits that could affect behavioral movements.
This research aims at the development of
personality traits- driven social interaction where the
behavioral movement for establishing a group
formation depends on the personality type of the
agents. Output of this work will make benefit for the
study of behavioral-based simulation in architectural
design where each personality trait has preference
over particular architectural design elements.

II. MODEL OF SOCIAL INTERACTION
A. Personality Traits Model
Our model determined social interaction by the
level of Extraversion trait and Agreeableness trait. The
Extraversion trait level determine likeness of agent to
attract or to repel other agent and the Agreeableness
trait level determine the possibility of agent to be
attracted by other agent to conduct social interaction.
These traits are determined from multiple numerical
inputs according to each personality facets and then
each trait is categorized into three levels of traits: low,
medium and high, respectively. On each category, we
defined its behavioral characteristic level of force of
attraction, force of repulsion and social interaction.
These forces model are developed as an improvement
from previous study [10] to suit with the situation and
specific variables of simulation.

1) The Force of Attraction (FoA)
Mathematical model to describe attraction force is
based on the distance over two agents by using
Probability Distribution Function. The computation
used real time distance data during simulation. This
model can be formulated as (1):

Computational Model of Social Interaction in Multi-
agent Simulation based on Personality Traits
Aswin Indraprastha
1

School of Architecture, Planning and Policy Development
Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia
T



Where y=force of attraction; x=distance between
agents; a and b=simulation chosen constant according
to Extraversion level.
The value of a and b is determined according to the
Extraversion level as depicted in diagram below
(Fig.1):

Fig. 1. Force of attraction of the three categories of Extraversion
types. The extrovert type has highest level of attraction and it lasts
in longest distance than others.

The above constants are conformed the category of
personal distances from Proxemic theory [9]. By this
category, social interaction is likely occurred in the
range of social distance (between 1.22 m to 3.66m) as
depicted in figure below (Fig. 2):

Fig. 2. Category of personal distances by Hall (1960)

2) The Force of Repulsion (FoR)
In modeling repulsion force, we used Moderate
level of Extraversion as a base line for determining a
personal distance where agent repulses other agents.
The maximum value of this force is 1.0 and by
reaching 0.5, agent is repulsing other agents.
The model to describe this force is using
exponential decay function as presented (2):

Where f= force of repulsion; d=distance between
agents; c is the constant for the limit of personal
distance categories. For Moderate-Extraversion type
personality, the constant c=2.13, for Extrovert and
Introvert types, the constant c=0.46 and 7.62,
respectively.
The Extrovert type has minimum repulsion distance
as he tends to attract other agent. On the other way,
the Introvert type has the maximum repulsion distance
as he tends not to be disturbed by other agent.
The overall model for each of Extraversion
category is by changing the constant as described
below (Fig. 3).
Figure 3 indicates that Moderate Extraversion type
has the level of force of repulsion= 0.5 at the distance
of 1m-1.2m. The same level reached at the 0.65m and
1.75m for Extrovert and Introvert types respectively.

Fig. 3. Force of repulsion of the three categories of Extraversion
types.

3) Level of Social Interaction
The social interaction level is determined by two
factors: first, the interaction level which is determined
by level of Extraversion using this formula (3):

Where i and j =agent, I = interaction level, E=
Extraversion level .

The formula above indicates dependency of
interaction level by the Extraversion level of each
agent. At the first encounter, social interaction level
depends on the level of Extraversion trait of each
agent.
Second, the social interaction level is likely changes
by the influence of Agreeableness level and an
uncertainty factor that occurred after the first
encounter. This can be modeled by using exponential
decay function that relates interaction level,
Agreeableness level, and randomized value that
represents its uncertainty (4).

Where A= Interaction level (I ), B=
Agreeableness level ( ), x= random value
( ).

Our model determined the social interaction is
occurred if the current state of interaction level is
greater than 0.5.

4) Uncertainty model with random value
The idea to use randomize value is to represent and
to model uncertainty or unpredictable of behavior
towards forming a social interaction.
Even though an agent is considered as an Altruist
(high level of Agreeableness), there is no guarantee
that he intends to make interaction with others. In our
model, Agreeableness level could increase the chance
of the establishment of social interaction.
Assuming random value is a normal distribution
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 3 3.3 3.6
A
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n

f
o
r
c
e
Distance
Moderate
Extrovert
Introvert
a=2.89;b=2.40
a=1.0;b=1.45
a=0.225;b=0.762
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 0.30.60.91.21.51.82.12.42.7 3 3.33.6
R
e
p
u
l
s
i
o
n

f
o
r
c
e
Distance
Moderate
Extrovert
Introvert
c=7.62
c=2.13
c=0.46



then the relationship between Agreeableness level and
Interaction level is as presented in Figure 4.


Fig. 4. Influence of Agreeableness level and random value to the
interaction level

As depicted in Figure 4, there are some points
noted:
- On any random value (0,1 ), high
Agreeableness level (Altruist) always
obtain highest interaction level with lowest
standard deviation (around 0.17). The
lowest interaction level is achieved when
random value>0.8
- On any random level, in the range of lower
agreeableness level, the result has wide
spectrum (with highest standard deviation,
around 0.32). The way to get interaction
above 0.5 is when random value between
0-0.5
Using standard deviation on each range of
Agreeableness level, we developed three categories of
interaction level to filter out the probability of group
formation based on Agreeableness level with the
consideration of random value as follows:
- for Altruist=0.48. It increases possibility of
group formation by 80%;
- for Moderate=(0.48+0.22)=0.69;
- for Egoist=(0.48+0.32)=0.80;

Using this threshold value, the Altruist type has
most probability to create a group and in other way,
the Egoist type has less probability to create a group.
In Our experiments, this model fairly represents
behavior of Altruist type that has 90% possibility to
create a group formation than others two types of
Agreeableness. The moderate type has 50%
possibility, which appropriately make sense and the
last, the Egoist type has near zero possibility to create
group form after ten experiments.

B. Group Formation
A group formation is a model to represent social
interaction of agent with different personality types.
As stated in previous section, the driving force for
social interaction is Extraversion level and
Agreeableness level. Extraversion level falls into three
categories: Extrovert, Moderate and Introvert.
Agreeableness level falls into three categories:
Altruist, Moderate and Egoist.
On the basis of these categories, we modeled the
group category based on Extraversion level.

TABLE. 1. GROUP CATEGORY BASED ON EXTRAVERSION LEVEL
E is extrovert or
tolerant
E is introvert
E is extrovert
or tolerant
Group type-1 Group type-2
E is introvert Group type-2 No group

Group category as determined in Table 1 suggests
that agent who feels comfortable with certain type of
other agent possibly forms a group for a certain time
delay. This group formation also may occurred if they
attract each other.

1) Group type-1
This group formed by the members of extrovert or
tolerant agents. The characteristic of group type-1 is
where in range of the force of attraction, they
approach each other to where group will be formed.
This characteristic can be illustrated in Table 2 below:

TABLE. 2. GROUP TYPE-1

(t=0)

(t=t1)

(t=t+t1)
All tree agent has
E = introvert
Suppose agent
i
and
agent
j
are extrovert
or combination of
extrovert and tolerant
then they will
approach each other
to form first group
Suppose agent
k
is
either extrovert
or tolerant, then
he will approach
first group if the
group is within
the distance of
his attraction
force

2) Group type-2
This group formed between any members of
extrovert or tolerant with introvert agents. The
characteristic of group type-2 is the member from
higher level of Extraversion approaches the introvert
agents as illustrated in Table 3 below:

TABLE. 3. GROUP TYPE-2

(t=0)

(t=t1)

(t=t+t1)
Only agent
k
is
introvert
Suppose agent
i
and
agent
j
are extrovert
or combination with
tolerant then they
will approach each
other
agent
k
is introvert,
then he stays and
approached by
other agents
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.9 1
I
n
t
e
r
a
c
t
i o
n
l e
v
e
l
Agreeableness
Rand=0.2
Rand=0.4
Rand=0.8
Rand=0.6
Altruist Moderate Egoist
Altruist
0.17 =
Moderate
0.22 = Egoist
0.32 =
Base=0.48
Agent i
Agent j
Agent k
Agent i
Agent j
Agent k
Agent i
Agent j
Agent k
Agent i
Agent j
Agent k
Agent i
Agent j
Agent k
Agent j
Agent i
Agent k



III. MODEL IMPLEMENTATION
A. The Detection Procedure
Assume that maximum distance for social interaction
is 3.60m and horizontal viewing angle is 100
0
. Then
each agent is going to detect position of any other
agent at any time, whether it is in the area of his
viewing field.
If so, then program begins for social interaction
procedures. We denoted that this visibility area of the
agent is a mean for triggering social interaction.
For such purpose, the model of viewing area relies
on the followings factors:
1. Frontal outward distance: 3.60m as a constant
where social contact is occurred.
2. Viewing angle: 100
0
as average human horizontal
viewing angle.

Illustration of viewing area used by this concept is
as follows (Figure 5):


Fig. 5. Horizontal viewing area

The visibility area model is an isosceles triangle
where greatest angle is at the point of viewer=100
0
as
displayed in Figure 5. Since the frontal distance and
origin angle is constant which is 3.60 and 100
0

respectively, we can determine the other two
maximum points (Figure 6):

Fig. 6. Determination of maximum coordinates of an isosceles
triangle.

The procedure to determine maximum coordinates
is as follows:
1. Define current position of agent i (x
i
,y
i
)
2. Define current unit vector direction of agent i
(x
i
,y
i
)
3. Define frontal distance d=3.6
4. Determine

5. Determine point of frontal view (x
id
,y
id
) by:

6. Determine orthogonal vector i

dir
=i

dir
by:

7. Determine two maximum coordinates
i
max1
(x
imax1
, y
imax1
) and i
max2
(x
imax2
, y
imax2
) by:

B. Detection of movement and direction
The social interaction only occurs if agents are
facing each others. By this logic, if an agent sees other
agent in his viewing area, he must detect other agent is
moving towards him and not the other way.
In our model, the agent detects this condition by
comparing distance on a time stamp. This concept is
illustrated in Figure 7.
If the agent detects other agent, he set the time t=t
0
and gets the distance to other agent, d=d
0
. On the
t
1
=t
0
+1, he gets the distance d
1
=d. If d
1
>d
0
then it is
assumed that he and/or other agent are moving
towards each other

Fig. 7. Distance different on a specific time-stamp

C. Point-in-Polygon Algorithm
Following above procedure, we develop technique to
determine whether a point lies in the interior or on the
line of the viewing area. There are various methods to
compute this condition as the viewing area model is a
polygon that is two dimensional, simple (there is no
intersection segment) and a convex one.
For a simple and practical purpose, we choose a
method of intersected route [11]. This method is
illustrated by diagram below (Figure 8).
Given O is current agent
i
position, J is agent
j

( , )
pos i i
i x y
dir i
( , )
d id id
i x y
h
u
d
max1 max1 max1
( , )
i i
i x y
Y
X
X +
Y +
1
'
dir
i
max2 max2 max2
( , )
i i
i x y
2
'
dir
i
Agent i
x-
z-
Agent k
x+
z-
Agent i
x-
z-
Agent k
x+
z-
1 0
tan dis ce at t t =
2 0
tan
t
dis ce at t t
+
=
2 1
tan tan dis ce dis ce <



position, A and B are maximum point of agent
i

viewing area. The method considers polygon OAB as
a path that traverses from O to point A and to point B
and finally back to point A. Point J is in the interior of
polygon OAB if and only if it is always on the same
side of all the line segments that making up the path.

Fig. 8. Point-in-Polygon

The procedure of the method is as follows:
1. Define: O(x
o
,y
o
), A(x
A
,y
A
), B (x
B
, y
B
), and J
(x
J
,y
J
)
2. Determine J where:
J
1
=(y
j
-y
0
)(x
a
-x
0
)-(x
j
-x
0
)(y
a
-y
0
)
J
2
=(y
j
-y
a
)(x
b
-x
a
)-(x
j
-x
a
)(y
b
-y
a
)
J3=(y
j
-y
b
)(x
0
-x
b
)-(x
j
-x
b
)(y
0
-y
b
)
3. J(xj,yj) is inside OAB if: {J
1
and J
2
and J
3
}>0
4. J(xj,yj) is on and outside OAB if : {J
1
or J
2
or
J
3
} 0

D. Distance interpolation
In multi agent simulation, the total influence of
influence (FoA and FoR) received by current agent by
having other agents personality is by mean of
interpolation of their distance.
This means the determination of force of attraction
and force of repulsion are not solely rely on the
nearest agent but considering influence of distance
and direction from others as well.
If there are three agents: i, j, k, and the distances
between them are ij, ik, jk , then the distances
towards agent i are ij and ik. The procedure for
distance interpolation considering these distances and
direction of other agent as follows:
1. If other agents are either moving toward
agent i or moving outward, then the
interpolated distance is in favor of the nearest
one (in this case, agent j):
d1=(0.5(0.75ij+0.25ik))
2. If only one agent is moving toward agent i,
then the interpolated distance has greater
value by the nearest one (in this case, agent
j): d2=(0.5(0.90ij+0.10ik))

Figure 9 below illustrates the distance interpolation
criteria:

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 9. Criteria for distances interpolations

a) all agents moving toward each others d
(t)
< d
(t-1)

.Agent i detects which one is the nearest and
determine interpolated distance (d1).
b and c) agent i detects which one is moving toward
him and determine interpolated distance (d2)
d) all agents moving outward agent i and d
(t)
< d
(t-
1)
. Agent i detects which one is the nearest and
determine interpolated distance (d1)

Distance interpolation executed as a mean to compute
average distance to other agents regarding their
direction vector in addition to their distance. In
experiment, this method gives better calculation for
distance measurement that result in their force of
attraction and force of repulsion.

IV. EXPERIMENTS AND RESULT
We conducted simulation in Virtools. On these
experiments, we evaluated group formation based on
the category of personality types.
By the influence of the level of personality types
and distance, each agent has their own force of
attraction and force of repulsion. Following this, we
set up goal-directed rules for each agent. The scheme
of this simulation is as follows:
1. Each agent traverses for his own goal-directed
movements for the goals, determined by their
personality trait.
2. On progress, these rules are evaluated by the
social-interaction rules as previously defined.
3. In completing social interaction, each agent
traverses back for their goals until all goals are
visited.

For such purpose, we set up goals that are
determined by the configuration of the boundary
elements. By superimposing boundary elements such
as window and door, we divided an interior space into
subdivided spaces. The goals are the center point of
these spaces.
O
A
B
J



On each personality trait, we generate random
sequence of these goals so each personality trait has
different routes to visit all goals.
On an example, we presented the group simulation
as a result from personality-traits driven behavioral
movements using these personality types (Table 4):
One of the examples is presented here as follows
(Table 5):

TABLE.4. PERSONALITY TYPES OF AGENTS FOR EXPERIMENT
Extraversion
level
Agreeableness
level
Agent i 0.89 (Extrovert) 0.94 (Altruist)
Agent j 0.44 (Moderate) 0.86 (Altruist)
Agent k 0.79 (Extrovert) 0.21 (Egoist)

The snapshots of the experiment shows dynamic
forces applied (Figure 10):


(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 10. Snapshots of the experiment; the dots represent goals

In Figure 10, all snapshots show radius of the force
of attraction (outer circle) and the force of repulsion
(inner circle). These radiuses are depending on the
personality type of the agent and the distance towards
other agent at any given time. On this situation,
Extrovert agent has greatest FoA radius and lowest
FoR radius.
Following the experiments, we presented the group
formation simulation as a result from personality-traits
driven behavioral movements using different
personality traits levels (Table 5):

TABLE. 5. PERSONALITY TYPES OF AGENT FOR EXPERIMENT OF
GROUP FORMATION
Extraversion
level
Agreeableness
level
Agent i 0.82 0.17
Agent j 0.81 0.86
Agent k 0.76 0.21

The snapshots of simulation are presented as
follows (Figure 11.):


(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)
Fig. 11. Snapshots of the experiment of group formation; grey
circles on area represents traces of group formations.
From experiments as demonstrated above, we can
see that if we embedded procedures for social
interaction into each agent, it is increasing probability
for group formation.
It makes sense to note that if two or more group
node intersects with each other (image f in Figure 10),
that particular area is regarded as area with higher
probability for social interaction than the others and
could be considered as public area.
V. DISCUSSION
Through series of experiments, the proposed model is
able to represent variability of social interaction in
virtual simulation. The sociability levels being
modeled are based on category of personality traits.
We suggested that based on this model, the more
elaborated method which extent each personality trait
features can be achieved.
We proposed model of the force of attraction and
the force of repulsion as basic features to distinguish
Extraversion trait levels with respect to the category of
social distances. This provides solution to address
aspects of heterogeneity and dynamic situation in
social interaction simulation, particularly in relation
with architectral design elements.
In practical level, behavioral-based simulation in
architectural design can facilitate quantitative analysis
of the relationship between personalities and design
qualities.

REFERENCES
[1] Tversky, Barbara. Three Dimensions of Spatial Cognition.
Susan E. Gathercole and Cesare Cornoldi (eds.) Martin A.
Conway. Theories of Memory, Volume II, Psychology Press,
1998.
[2] Tversky, Barbara. Structure of Mental Spaces: How People
Think About Space, Environment and Behavior, Vol.35 No.1,
pp.66-80, Sage Publishing, 2003
[3] Sjolinder, Marie. Individual Differences in Spatial Cognition
and Hypermedia Navigation, Department of Psychology,
Stockholm University, 1998.
[4] Helbing, D., Farkas, I., & Vicsek. T. Simulating dynamical
features of escape panic, Nature, 407(6803), 487-90, 2000.
[5] Helbing, D., & Molnr, P. Social force model for pedestrian
dynamics. Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas,
fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics, 51(5), 4282-4286,
1995.
[6] Luengo, F, & Iglesias, A. Designing an Action Selection
Engine for Behavioral Animation of Intelligent.
Computational Science and Its Applications ICCSA,
3482/2005, 1157-1166, 2005.



[7] Pelechano, Nuria, F. D. The Impact of the OCEAN
Personality Model on the Perception of Crowds. IEEE
Explorer on Computer Graphics and Application, 2007.
[8] Sato, T., & Hashimoto, T. Dynamic Social Simulation with
Multi-Agents. In A.Sakurai (Eds.), 18
th
Annual Conferences of
the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence, 2007.
[9] Hall, E.T. Proxemics, Current Anthropology, Vol. 09, 1968.
[10] Williams, S. A, & Huang, D. Group force mobility model and
its obstacle avoidance capability. Acta Astronautica, 65(7-8),
949-957, 2009.
[11] Burke, Paul. Determining if a point lies on the interior of a
polygon,1987.Available:
http://www.paulburke.net/geometry/insidepoly/