Scaling up from dialogue to multilogue: some principles and benchmarks
Pages 231 - 238
Abstract
The paper considers how to scale up dialogue protocols to multilogue, settings with multiple conversationalists. We extract two benchmarks to evaluate scaled up protocols based on the long distance resolution possibilities of non-sentential utterances in dialogue and multilogue in the British National Corpus. In light of these benchmarks, we then consider three possible transformations to dialogue protocols, formulated within an issue-based approach to dialogue management. We show that one such transformation yields protocols for querying and assertion that fulfill these benchmarks.
References
[1]
Special issue on best practice in spoken language dialogue systems engineering. 2003. Natural Language Engineering.
[2]
Herbert Clark. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[3]
Robin Cooper. 2004. A type theoretic approach to information state update in issue based dialogue management. Invited paper, Catalog '04, the 8th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona.
[4]
James Dabbs and R. Barry Ruback. 1987 Dimensions of group process: amount and structure of vocal interaction. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 20, pages 123--169.
[5]
Frank P. M. Dignum and Gerard A. W. Vreeswijk. 2003. Towards a testbed for multi-party dialogues. In Proceedings of the first International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (AAMAS 2003).
[6]
Nicholas Fay, Simon Garrod, and Jean Carletta. 2000. Group discussion as interactive dialogue or serial monologue. Psychological Science, pages 481--486.
[7]
Raquel Fernández and Jonathan Ginzburg. 2002. Non-sentential utterances: A corpus study. Traitement automatique des languages. Dialogue, 43(2): 13--42.
[8]
FIPA. 2003. The foundation for intelligent physical agents, interaction protocol specifications. http://www.fipa.org.
[9]
Roger Garside. 1987. The CLAWS word-tagging system, In Roger Garside et al. editors, The computational analysis of English: a corpus-based approach, Longman, Harlow, pages 30--41.
[10]
Jonathan Ginzburg and Robin Cooper. 2001. Resolving ellipsis in clarification. In Proceedings of the 39th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Toulouse.
[11]
Jonathan Ginzburg and Ivan A. Sag. 2000. Interrogative Investigations: the form, meaning and use of English Interrogatives. Number 123 in CSLI Lecture Notes. CSLI Publications, Stanford: California.
[12]
Jonathan Ginzburg. (forthcoming). Semantics and Interaction in Dialogue CSLI Publications and University of Chicago Press.
[13]
Jonathan Ginzburg. 1996. Interrogatives: Questions, facts, and dialogue. In Shalom Lappin, editor, Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Blackwell, Oxford.
[14]
Erving Goffman 1981 Forms of Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
[15]
Staffan Larsson. 2002. Issue based Dialogue Management. Ph.D. thesis, Gothenburg University.
[16]
Colin Matheson and Massimo Poesio and David Traum. 2000. Modelling Grounding and Discourse Obligations Using Update Rules. Proceedings of NAACL 2000, Seattle.
[17]
Stephen Pulman. 1997. Focus and higher order unification. Linguistics and Philosophy, 20.
[18]
Matthew Purver. 2004. The Theory and Use of Clarification in Dialogue. Ph.D. thesis, King's College, London.
[19]
David Traum and Jeff Rickel. 2002. Embodied agents for multi-party dialogue in immersive virtual world. In Proceedings of the first International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (AAMAS 2002), pages 766--773.
[20]
David Traum. 2003. Semantics and pragmatics of questions and answers for dialogue agents. In H. Bunt, editor, Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Computational Semantics, pages 380--394, Tilburg. ITK, Tilburg University.
- Scaling up from dialogue to multilogue: some principles and benchmarks
Recommendations
Dialog acts in greeting and leavetaking in social talk
ISIAA 2017: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI International Workshop on Investigating Social Interactions with Artificial AgentsConversation proceeds through dialogue moves or acts, and dialog act annotation can aid the design of artificial dialog. While many dialogs are task-based or instrumental, with clear goals, as in the case of a service encounter or business meeting, ...
Exploring Mixed-Initiative Dialogue Using Computer Dialogue Simulation
This paper experimentally shows that mixed-initiative dialogue is not always more efficient than non-mixed initiative dialogue in route finding tasks. Based on the dialogue model proposed in Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis a lá the ...
Towards Conversationally Intelligent Dialog Systems
CHI EA '22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsSpoken dialog systems, lacking the means to address the complex phenomena of spontaneous speech and conversational dynamics, force users into a constrained mode of dialog that resembles text-based interaction more closely than spoken conversation. Turn-...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Publisher
Association for Computational Linguistics
United States
Publication History
Published: 25 June 2005
Qualifiers
- Article
Acceptance Rates
ACL '05 Paper Acceptance Rate 77 of 423 submissions, 18%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 85 of 443 submissions, 19%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 310Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)68
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12
Reflects downloads up to 15 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in