• International Journal of Contents
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.7-16
• /
• 2018

The extent and depth of the event plan determines the scope of pedagogical experience in situations and consequently the quality of immersive learning based on our simulated world. In contrast to planning in conventional narrative-based systems mainly pursuing dramatic interests, planning in virtual world-based pedagogical systems strive to provide realistic experiences in immersed situations. Instead of story plot comprising predetermined situations, our inter-event planning method aims at simulating diverse situations that each involve multiple events coupled via their associated agents' conditions and meaningful associations between events occurring in a background world. The specific techniques to realize our planning method include, two-phase planning based on inter-event search and intra-event decomposition (down to the animated action level); autonomous and independent agents to behave proactively with their own belief and planning capability; full-blown background world to be used as the comprehensive stage for all events to occur in; coupling events via realistic association types including deontic associations as well as conventional causality; separation of agents from event roles; temporal scheduling; and parallel and concurrent event progression mechanism. Combining all these techniques, diverse exogenous events can be derived and seamlessly (i.e., semantically meaningfully) integrated with the original event to form a wide scope of situations providing chances of abundant pedagogical experiences. For effective implementation of plan execution, we devise an execution scheme based on multiple priority queues, particularly to realize concurrent progression of many simultaneous events to simulate its corresponding reality. Specific execution mechanisms include modeling an action in terms of its component motions, adjustability of priority for agent across different events, and concurrent and parallel execution method for multiple actions and its expansion for multiple events.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.50
• /
• pp.313-346
• /
• 2018

It is noted that generally speaking, the expressing of actualization or non-actualization of events is not the main role of possibility for the utilization of expressions. In spite of this fact, it is possible to see many examples in which possibility expressions represent actual events, and impossibility expressions represent a type of non-actualization in relation to events. This effect can be described as a semantic extension, by which the participant-internal possibility is extended to actualization due to participant-internal factors, and the participant-external possibility is extended to the actualization due to participant-external factors. When the related possibility expressions are used in this extended sense, they express the dynamic evaluative meaning of 'desirability' of the realized event, while it is determined that when the impossibility expressions are used in this extended sense, they are seen to express the evaluative meaning of 'regretfulness' about the non-actualization of the event. In Modern Japanese, it is noted that there are a few expressions of ability and possibility. They can be largely divided into four types of expressions, according to their origins or uses of expression, which are 'ability verbs', affixes '-れる/られる(-reru/rareru)', '-できる(-dekiru)', and '-得る(-eru)'. They can all express participant-internal possibility and participant-external non-deontic possibility. While 'ability verbs', affixes '-れる/られる' and '-できる' can express participant-external deontic possibility, '-得る' cannot. However, '-得る' is the only possible element to designate the event of a epistemic possibility. Also, the four types of expressions have the usage of conveying 'actualization/non-actualization,' as is the case of the Korean language. However in Japanese, in fact adjectives cannot be associated with 'ability verbs' or 'ability affixes.' Thus the expressions of 'regrets' should in that case depend on the use contexts, unlike the expression 'adj+-지 못하다' as noted in Korean. The ability and possibility in Modern Chinese are mainly expressed by means of the four auxiliary verbs '能($n{\acute{e}}ng$)', '会(huì)', '可以(kěyǐ)' and '可能 ($k{\check{e}}n{\acute{e}}ng$)'. '能' and '会' along with '可以' can all convey participant-internal possibility. In this way '能' and '可以' can express participant-external possibility. Only '会' and '可能' can express epistemic possibility. As for 'actualization,' among the four auxiliary verbs, only '能' can represent actualization. Also, among the negatives of the four auxiliary verbs, only '沒能' can represent non-actualization.