Tailoring inference-rich descriptions through making compromises between conflicting cooperation principles

International Journal of Human Computer Studies

Volumn 53, Issue 6, 2000, Pages 1117-1146

  Horacek, Helmut ^a  

^a SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

COLLABORATION; CONFLICTS;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 0034504055     PISSN: 10715819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/ijhc.2000.0430     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. ALLWOOD, J. (1976). Linguistic Communication as Action and Cooperation. Gothenburg Monographs in Linguistics, Vol. 2. Department of Linguistics, University of Gothenburg.
2. ALLWOOD, J., TRAUM, D. & JOKINEN, K. (2000). Cooperation, dialogue, and Ethics. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53, 871-914.
3. BENZMÜLLER, C. & SORGE, V. (1998). A blackboard architecture for guiding interactive proofs. In GIUNCHIGLIA, F., Ed. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, Applications (AIMSA '98), pp. 102-114, Sozopol, Bulgaria.
4. BENZMÜLLER, C., CHEIKHROUHOU, L., FEHRER, D., FIEDLER, A., HUANG, X., KERBER, M., KOHLHASE, M., KONRAD, K., MELIS, E., MEIER, A., SCHAARSCHMIDT, W., SIEKMANN, J. & SORGE, V. (1997). ΩMEGA: towards a mathematical assistant. In W. MCCUNE, Ed. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-97), pp. 252-255, Townsville, Australia.
5. CHESTER, J. (1976). The translation of formal proofs into English. Artificial Intelligence, 7, 261-278.
6. COHEN, P. & LEVESQUE, H. (1990). Rational interaction as a basis for communication. In COHEN, P., MORGAN, J. & POLLACK, M., Eds. Intentions in Communication, pp. 221-225, SDF Benchmark Series, MIT Press.
7. COHEN, P. & LEVESQUE, H. (1991). Conformation and joint action. In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-91), pp. 951-957, Sydney, Australia.
8. DAHN, I. (1998). Using ILF as a user interface for many theorem provers. In BACKHOUSE, R., Ed. Proceedings of the Informal Workshop on User Interfaces for Theorem Provers, pp. 75-86, Computer Science Reports 98/08, Eindhoven, University of Technology, the Netherlands.
9. DENZINGER, J. & FUCHS, D. (1999). Cooperation of heterogeneous provers. Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-99), pp. 10-15, Stockholm, Sweden.
10. EDGAR, A. & PELLETIER, F. (1993). Natural language explanation of natural deduction proofs. Proceedings of the 1st Conference of the Pacific Association for Computational Linguistics.
11. FEHRER, D. & HORACEK, H. (1997). Exploiting the addressee's inferential capabilities in presenting mathematical proofs. Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-97), pp. 959-964, Nagoya, Japan.
12. GRICE, H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3, Speech Acts, pp. 43-58. New York: Academic Press.
13. GROSZ, B. & KRAUS, S. (1996). Collaborative plans for complex group action. Artificial Intelligence, 86, 269-357.
14. GROSZ, B. & KRAUS, S. (1999). The evolution of shared plans. In A. RAO & M. WOOLDRIDGE, Eds. Foundations of Rational Agency, pp. 227-262, Kluwer Academic.
15. HORACEK, H. (1996). Planning in natural language generation: particularities and perspectives. Gaps and Bridges: New Directions in Planning and Natural Language Generation. Workshop at ECAI-96, Budapest.
16. HORACEK, H. (1997). A model for adapting explanations to the user's likely inferences. User Modeling and User Adapted Interaction, 7, 1-55.
17. HORACEK, H. (1998). Generating inference-rich discourse through revisions of RST trees. Proceedings of AAAI-98, pp. 814-820, Madison, WI.
18. HORACEK, H. (1999). Presenting proofs in a human-oriented way. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-99), pp. 142-156, Trento, Italy.
19. HUANG, X. (1994). Reconstructing proofs at the assertion level. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-94), pp. 738-752, Nancy, France.
20. HUANG, X. & FIEDLER, A. (1996). Presenting machine-found proofs. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-96), pp. 221-225, New Brunswick, NJ.
21. HUANG, X. & FIEDLER, A. (1997). Proof verbalization as an application of NLG. Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-97), pp. 965-970. Nagoya, Japan.
22. JOHANSEN (1988). Groupware - Computer Support for Business Teams. New York: The Free Press.
23. JOKINEN, K. (1994). Response planning in information-seeking dialogues. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology.
24. JOKINEN, K., MAYBURY, M., ZOCK, M. & ZUKERMAN, I. (1996). Introduction to the Workshop Gaps and Bridges: New Directions in Planning in Natural Language Generation, ECAI-96.
25. JOKINEN, K. (1997). Ideal cooperation in dialogues. Proceedings of Workshop on Collaboration, Cooperation, and Conflict in Dialogue Systems, IJCAI-97.
26. LOCHBAUM, K. (1994). Using collaborative plans to model the intentional structure of discourse, Ph.D. Thesis, TR 25-94, Hardvard University.
27. MANN, W. & THOMPSON, S. (1983). Rhetorical structure theory: a theory of text organization. Technical Report ISI/RR-83-115, ISI, University of Southern California.
28. MCDONALD, D. (1983). Natural language generation as a computational problem. In BRADY, BERWICK, Eds. Computational Models of Discourse. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. MOORE, J. & SWARTOUT, W. (1989). A reactive approach to explanations. Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-89), pp. 1504-1510, Detroit, MI, USA.
30. OBERQUELLE, H. Ed, (1991). Kooperatives Arbeiten und Computerunterstützung. Stand und Perspektiven. Göttingen/Stuttgart, Verlag für angewandte Psychologie.
31. POLLOCK, (1987). Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science, 11, 481-518.
32. REED, C. & LONG, D. (1998). Generating the structure of argument. Proceedings of 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL'98), pp. 1091-1097, Montreal, Quebec.
33. SADEK, D., BRETIER, P. & PANAGET, F. (1997). ARTIMIS: natural dialogue meets rational agency. Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-97), pp. 1030-1035, Nagoya, Japan.
34. STICKEL, M. (1986). Schubert's steamroller problem: formalisations and solution. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 2, 89-101.
35. THÜRING, M. & WENDER, K. (1985). Über kausale Inferenzen beim Lesen. Sprache und Kognition, 2, 76-86.
36. TOULMIN, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press.
37. WALKER, M. (1996). The effect of resource limits and task complexity on collaborative planning in dialogue. Artificial Intelligence, 85, 181-243.