Great storytelling takes us on a journey the way ordinary reality rarely does. But what exactly do we mean by a "journey"? Recently, literary theorist Kukkonen (2014) proposed that storytelling is "probability design": the art of giving an audience pieces of information bit by bit, to craft the *journey of their changing beliefs* about the fictional world. A good "probability design" choreographs a delicate dance of certainty and surprise in the reader's mind as the story unfolds from beginning to end. In this paper, we computationally model this conception of storytelling. Building on the classic Bayesian inverse planning model of human social cognition, we treat storytelling as *inverse* inverse planning: the task of choosing actions to manipulate an inverse planner's inferences, and therefore a human audience's beliefs. First, we use an inverse inverse planner to depict social and physical situations, and present behavioral studies indicating that inverse inverse planning produces more expressive behavior than ordinary "naïve planning." Then, through a series of examples, we demonstrate how inverse inverse planning captures many storytelling elements from first principles: character, narrative arcs, plot twists, irony, flashbacks, and deus ex machina are all naturally encoded in the flexible language of probability design.

We offer a computational framework for modeling explanation as cooperative rational communication. Under our framework, when an explainer is faced with a ``why?'' question, they reason about the question-asker's current mental model, and intervene on that mental model in order to maximize the listener's future utility. We instantiate our framework in a planning domain, and show that our framework can model human explanations about plans across a wide variety of scenarios.

Much of social cognition involves reasoning about others' minds: predicting their reactions, inferring their feelings, and explaining their behavior. By representing mental contents like beliefs, desires, and emotions, Bayesian theory of mind mod- els have made progress in capturing how humans manage these cognitive feats. But social life is not merely observation: hu- mans must also plan to intervene on these same mental con- tents. The present work models how people choose interven- tions to influence others' emotions. Building on a prior model of people's intuitive theory of emotions, we model how people use their intuitive theory to evaluate and simulate the effects of different interventions. We apply our model to data from behavioral experiments requiring counterfactual and joint in- terventions, and show a close alignment with human choices. Our results provide a step towards a potentially unifying expla- nation for emotion prediction and intervention, suggesting that they could arise from the same underlying generative model.

In recent years, the field of computer graphics has achieved its longstanding dream of photorealism: modern graphics algorithms produce images that are indistinguishable from reality. Much like art at the advent of photography, then, computer graphics is now turning its gaze to the beholder: researchers are increasingly looking to cognitive science to engineer new modes of visual expression. Recent work has sought to apply insights from cognitive science to a variety of traditional graphics topics: from taking a perceptual approach to perspective, to studying the theory of mind behind animation, to applying theories of abstraction learning to build tools for geometry processing. At the same time, a wave of recent work in cognitive science has addressed fundamental questions about visual expression: for example, how humans understand and create sketches, shapes, and symbols. The field has also benefited greatly from tools and methods from computer graphics: differentiable rendering, physics simulation, and game engines have become indispensable in modeling human perception and intuitive physics. Recognizing this growing interdisciplinary exchange of ideas, we are proposing a workshop to begin building formal bridges between the cognitive science and computer graphics communities.