Microplanning with communicative intentions: The spud system

Computational Intelligence

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2003, Pages

  Stone, Matthew ^a   Doran, Christine ^b   Webber, Bonnie ^c   Bleam, Tonia ^d   Palmer, Martha ^e  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MITRE CORPORATION   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^d NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggregation; Lexical choice; Lexicalized grammar; Microplanning; Natural language generation; Referring expression generation; Syntactic choice

Indexed keywords

KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION; LINGUISTICS; LOGIC PROGRAMMING; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; SEMANTICS; SYNTACTICS;

LEXICAL CHOICE; LEXICALIZED GRAMMAR; MICROPLANNING; SYNTACTIC CHOICE;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 0344443753     PISSN: 08247935     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.0824-7935.2003.00221.x     Document Type: Review

References (122)

1. APPELT, D. 1985. Planning English Sentences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
2. BADLER, N., R. BINDIGANAVALE, J. ALLBECK, W. SCHULER, L. ZHAO, S.-J. LEE, H. SHIN, and M. PALMER. 2000. Parameterized action representation and natural language instructions for dynamic behavior modification of embodied agents. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Autonomous Agents. Published by the Association for Computing Machinery, New York, pp. 293-300.
3. BADLER, N., M. PALMER, and R. BINDIGANAVALE. 1999. Animation control for real-time virtual humans. Communications of the ACM, 42(7):65-73.
4. BALDONI, M., L. GIORDANO, and A. MARTELLI. 1998, A modal extension of logic programming: Modularity, beliefs and hypothetical reasoning. Journal of Logic and Computation, 8(5):597-635.
5. BIRNER, B. 1992. The discourse function of inversion in english, Ph.D. Thesis, Northwestern University.
6. BOURNE, J. C. 1999. Generating effective natural language instructions based on agent expertise, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
7. BRACHMAN, R., D. McGUINNESS, P. P. SCHNEIDER, L. A. RESNICK, and A. BORGIDA. 1990. Living with CLASSIC: When and how to use a KL-ONE-like language. In Principles of Semantic Networks. Edited by J. Sowa. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, pp. 401-456.
8. BRATMAN, M. E. 1987. Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
9. BUTT, M., T. H. KING, M.-E. NINO, and F. SEGOND. 1999. A Grammar Writer's Cookbook, Center for the Study of Language of Information-CSLI Press, Stanford, CA.
10. CAHILL, L., and M. REAPE. 1999. Component tasks in applied NLG systems. Technical Report ITRI-99-05, Information Technology Research Institute, University of Brighton.
11. CANDITO, M., and S. KAHANE. 1998. Can the TAG derivation tree represent a semantic graph? An answer in the light of meaning-text theory. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Tree-Adjoining Grammar and Related Formalisms (TAG+4).
12. CASSELL, J. 2000. Embodied conversational interface agents. Communications of the ACM, 43(4):70-78.
13. CASSELL, J., M. STONE, and H. YAN. 2000. Coordination and context-dependence in the generation of embodied conversation. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Natural Language Generation, Mitzpe Ramon, Israel, pp. 171-178.
14. CHEN, J., and K. VIJAY-SHANKER. 2000. Automated extraction of TAGs from the Perm treebank. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, Trento, Italy.
15. CHENG, H., and C. MELLISH. 2000. An empirical analysis of constructing non-restrictive NP components to express semantic relations. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Natural Language Generation, Mitzpe Ramon, Israel, pp. 108-115.
16. CLARK, H. H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
17. CLARK, H. H., and C. R. MARSHALL. 1981. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In Elements of Discourse Understanding. Edited by A. K. Joshi, B. L. Webber, and I. Sag. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 10-63.
18. DALE, R. 1992. Generating Referring Expressions: Constructing Descriptions in a Domain of Objects and Processes. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
19. DALE, R., and N. HADDOCK. 1991. Content determination in the generation of referring expressions. Computational Intelligence, 7(4):252-265.
20. DALE, R., and E. REITER. 1995. Computational interpretations of the Gricean maxims in the generation of referring expressions. Cognitive Science, 18:233-263.
21. DALIANIS, H. 1996. Concise natural language generation from formal specifications, Ph.D. Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
22. DANG, H. T., K. KIPPER, and M. PALMER. 2000. Integrating compositional semantics into a verb lexicon. In Proceedings of COLING-2000 Eighteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Saarbruecken, Germany, pp. 1011-1015.
23. DANLOS, L. 2000. G-TAG: A lexicalized formalism for text generation inspired by tree adjoining grammar. In Tree Adjoining Grammars: Formalisms, Linguistic Analysis and Processing. Edited by A. Abeillé and O. Rambow. CSLI, Stanford, CA, pp. 343-370.
24. DAVIDSON, D. 2002. The logical form of action sentences. In Essays on Actions and Events. Clarendon Press Oxford, pp. 105-121.
25. DEBART, F., P. ENJALBERT, and M. LESCOT. 1992. Multimodal logic programming using equational and order-sorted logic. Theoretical Computer Science, 105:141-166.
26. DI EUGENIO, B. and B. WEBBER, 1996. Pragmatic overloading in natural language instructions. Internationl Journal of Expert Systems, 9(2):53-84.
27. DORAN, C., D. EGEDI, B. A. HOCKEY, B. SRINIVAS, and M. ZAIDEL. 1994. XTAG System - a wide coverage grammar for English. In Proceedings of COLING, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 922-928.
28. DORAN, C., B. A. HOCKEY, A. SARKAR, B. SRINIVAS, and F. XIA. 2000. Evolution of the XTAG system. In Tree Adjoining Grammars: Formal, Computational and Linguistic Aspects. Edited by A. Abeillé and O. Rambow. CSLI, Stanford, CA, pp. 371-403.
29. ELHADAD, M., K. McKEOWN, and J. ROBIN. 1997. Floating constraints in lexical choice. Computational Linguistics, 23(2):195-240.
30. ELHADAD, M., and J. ROBIN. 1992. Controlling content realization with functional unification grammars. In Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation: Sixth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation Edited by R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. Rösner, and O. Stock. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 587. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp. 89-104.
31. FARIÑAS DEL CERRO, L. 1986. MOLOG: A system that extends PROLOG with modal logic. New Generation Computing, 4:35-50.
32. GARDENT, C., N. L. TILBERG, and K. STRIEGNITZ. 2001. Generating indirect anaphora. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Computational Semantics, Tilberg, The Netherlands, pp. 138-155.
33. GILDEA, D., and J. HOCKENMAIER. 2003. Identifying semantic roles using combinatory categorial grammar. In Proceedings of 2003 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNCP), Sapporo, Japan.
34. GRICE, H. P. 1957. Meaning. Philosophical Review, 66(3):377-388.
35. GUNDEL, J. K., N. HEDBERG, and R. ZACHARSKI. 1993. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2):274-307.
36. HADDOCK, N. 1989. Incremental semantics and interactive syntactic processing, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.
37. HARDT, D. 1999. Dynamic interpretation of verb phrase ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy, 22(2):187-221.
38. HART, P. E., N. J. NILSSON, and B. RAPHAEL. 1968. A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics, 4:100-107. (Correction in SIGART Newsletter 37:28-29.)
39. HIRSCHBERG, J. 1985. A theory of scalar implicature, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
40. HOBBS, J. R., M. STICKEL, D. APPELT, and P. MARTIN. 1993. Interpretation as abduction. Artificial Intelligence, 63:69-142.
41. HOBBS, J. R. 1985. Ontological promiscuity. In Proceedings of Association for Computational Linguistics, Baffalo, NY, pp. 61-69.
42. HOBBS, J. R., M. STICKEL, D. APPELT, and P. MARTIN. 1988. Interpretation as abduction. In Proceedings of ACL, pp. 95-103.
43. HOCKENMAIER, J., G. BIERNER, and J. BALDRIDGE. 2003. Extending the coverage of a CCG system. Research on Language and Computation, in press.
44. HOFFMAN, B. 1994. Generating context-appropriate word orders in Turkish. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Generation Workshop, Kennebunkport, ME, pp. 117-126.
45. HORACEK, H. 1995. More on generating referring expressions. In Proceedings of the Fifth European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp. 43-58.
46. JACKENDOFF, R. 1977. X Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
47. JACKENDOFF, R. 1990. Semantic Structures. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
48. JORDAN, P. W. 2000. Influences on attribute selection in redescriptions: Evidence from an empirical study, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pittsburgh.
49. JOSHI, A. K., and K. VIJAY-SHANKER. 1999. Compositional semantics with lexicalized tree-adjoining grammar (LTAG). In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Computational Semantics, Tilburg, The Netherlands, pp. 131-145.
50. JOSHI, A. K. 1987. The relevance of tree adjoining grammar to generation. In Natural Language Generation. Edited by G. Kempen. Martinus Nijhoff Press, Dordrecht, pp. 233-252.
51. JOSHI, A. K., L. LEVY, and M. TAKAHASHI. 1975. Tree adjunct grammars. Journal of the Computer and System Sciences, 10:136-163.
52. KALLMEYER, L., and A. JOSHI. 1999. Factoring predicate argument and scope semantics: Underspecified semantics with LTAG, Amsterdam, pp. 169-174. In Twelveth Amsterdam Colloquium.
53. KAMP, H., and A. ROSSDEUTSCHER. 1994. DRS-construction and lexically driven inference. Theoretical Linguistics, 20:97-164.
54. KEHLER, A., and G. WARD. 1999. On the semantics and pragmatics of "identifier so." In The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View. Edited by K. Turner. Elsevier, New York, pp. 233-256.
55. KINGSBURY, P., and K. KIPPER. 2003. Deriving verb-meaning clusters from syntactic structure. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Text Meaning, held in conjunction with HLT-NAACL 2003, Edmonton, Canada.
56. KINGSBURY, P., and M. PALMER. 2002. From treebank to propbank. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Las Palmas, Spain.
57. KIPPER, K., H. T. DANG, and M. PALMER. 2000. Class based construction of a verb lexicon. In Proceedings of the AAAI 2000 Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial. Intelligence, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, pp. 691-696.
58. KIPPER, K., H. T. DANG, W. SCHULER, and M. PALMER. 2000. Building a class based verb lexicon using TAGs. In Proceedings of the TAG+5 Fifth International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammars and Related Formalisms, Paris, France, pp. 147-154.
59. KITTREDGE, R., T. KORELSKY, and O. RAMBOW. 1991. On the need for domain communication knowledge. Computational Intelligence, 7(4):305-314.
60. LASCARIDES, A., and N. ASHER. 1991. Discourse relations and defeasible knowledge. In Proceedings of ACL, Berkeley, CA, pp. 55-62.
61. LEVELT, W. J. M. 1989. Speaking. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
62. LEVIN, B. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations: A preliminary investigation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
63. LEWIS, D. 1979. Scorekeeping in a language game. In Semantics from Different Points of View. Edited by R. Bäuerle, U. Egli, and A. von Stechow. Springer, Berlin, pp. 172-187.
64. MACKWORTH, A. 1987. Constraint satisfaction. In Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence. Edited by S. Shapiro. Wiley, New York, pp. 205-211.
65. MATHIESSEN, C. M. I. M. 1983. Systemic grammar in computation: The Nigel case. In Proceedings of the European Association for Computational Intelligence, Pisa, Italy, pp. 155-164.
66. McDONALD, D. D. 1992. Type-driven suppression of redundancy in the generation of inference-rich reports. In Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation: Sixth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 587. Edited by R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. Rösner, and O. Stock. Springer, Berlin, pp. 73-88.
67. McDONALD, D. D., and J. D. PUSTEJOVSKY. 1985. TAG's as a grammatical formalism for generation. In Proceedings of ACL, Chicago, IL, pp. 94-103.
68. MELLISH, C., M., O'DONNELL, J. OBERLANDER, and A. KNOTT. 1998. An architecture for opportunistic text generation. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Niagara-on-the-lake, Canada, pp. 28-37.
69. MELLISH, C. S. 1985. Computer Interpretation of Natural Language Descriptions. Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK.
70. METEER, M. W. 1991. Bridging the generation gap between text planning and linguistic realization. Computational Intelligence, 7(4):296-304.
71. MILLER, D., G. NADATHUR, F. PFENNING, and A. SCEDROV. 1991. Uniform proofs as a foundation for logic programming. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 51:125-157.
72. NICOLOV, N., C. MELLISH, and G. RITCHIE. 1995. Sentence generation from conceptual graphs. In Conceptual Structures: Applications, Implementation and Theory, Proceedings of Third International Conference on Conceptual Structures. Edited by G. Ellis, R. W. R. Levinson, and F. Sowa. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 74-88.
73. NILSSON, N. 1971. Problem-Solving Methods in Artificial Intelligence. McGraw-Hill, New York.
74. NOGIER, J., and M. ZOCK. 1991. Lexical choice as pattern-matching. In Current Directions in Conceptual Structures Research. Edited by T. Nagle, J. Nagle, L. Gerholz, and P. Eklund. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 200-212.
75. PALMER, M. 1990. Semantic Processing for Finite Domains. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
76. PEREIRA, F. C. N., and S. M. SHIEBER. 1987. Prolog and Natural Language Analysis. CSLI, Stanford, CA.
77. POLLACK, M. E. 1991. Overloading intentions for efficient practical reasoning. Noûs, 25:513-536.
78. POLLACK, M. E. 1992. The uses of plans. Artificial Intelligence, 57:43-68.
79. PREVOST, S., and M. STEEDMAN. 1993. Generating contextually appropriate intonation. In Proceedings of EACL, Utrecht, NL, pp. 332-340.
80. PRINCE, A., and P. SMOLENSKY. 1997. Optimality: From neural networks to universal grammar. Science, 275:1604-1610.
81. PRINCE, E. 1986. On the syntactic marking of presupposed open propositions. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago. CLS, pp. 208-222.
82. RAMBOW, O., and T. KORELSKY. 1992. Applied text generation. In Proceedings of the Applied Natural Language Processing Conference, Trento, Italy, pp. 40-47.
83. REITER, E. 1994. Has a consensus NL generation architecture appeared, and is it psycholinguistically plausible? In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Kennebunkport, ME, pp. 163-170.
84. REITER, E., and R. DALE. 2000. Building Natural Language Generation Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
85. RUBINOFF, R. 1992. Integrating text planning and linguistic choice by annotating linguistic structures. In Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 587. Edited by R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. Rösner, and O. Stock. Springer, Berlin, pp. 45-56.
86. SAEBOE, K. J. 1996. Anaphoric presuppositions and zero anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy, 19(2):187-209.
87. SARKAR, A. 2001. Applying co-training methods to statistical parsing. In Proceedings of the North American Association for Computational Linguistics, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 175-182.
88. SCHABES, Y. 1990. Mathematical and computational aspects of lexicalized grammars, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
89. SHAW, J. 1998. Clause aggregation using linguistic knowledge. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Niagara-on-the-lake, Canada, pp. 138-148.
90. SHIEBER, S. M., G. VAN NOORD, F. C. N. PEREIRA, and R. C. MOORE. 1990. Semantic-head-driven generation. Computational Linguistics, 16:30-42.
91. SHIEBER, S. M. 1991. A uniform architecture for parsing and generation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 614-619.
92. STEDE, M. 1998. A generative perspective on verb alternations. Computational Linguistics, 24(3):401-430.
93. STEEDMAN, M. 1997. Temporality. In Handbook of Logic and Language. Edited by J. van Benthem and A. ter Meulen. Elsevier, New York, pp. 895-935.
94. STONE, M. 1998. Modality in dialogue: Planning, pragmatics and computation, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
95. STONE, M. 1999. Indefinite information in modal logic programming. Technical Report RUCCS Report 56, Rutgers University.
96. STONE, M. 2000a. On identifying sets. In Proceedings of the First International Confernence on Natural Language Generation, Mitzpe Ramon, Israel, pp. 116-123.
97. STONE, M. 2000b. Towards a computational account of knowledge, action and inference in instructions. Journal of Language and Computation, 1:231-246.
98. STONE, M. 2002. Lexicalized grammar 101. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Effective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching NLP and CL, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 76-83.
99. STONE, M. 2003a. Communicative intentions and conversational processes in human-human and human-computer dialogue. In World-Situated Language Use: Psychological, Linguistic and Computational Perspectives on Bridging Product and Action Traditions. Edited by J. Trueswell, and M. Tanenhaus. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
100. STONE, M. 2003b. Natural language generation in computational theories of conversation, Manuscript, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ.
101. STONE, M., T. BLEAM, C. DORAN, and M. PALMER. 2000. Lexicalized grammar and the description of motion events. In Proceedings of the TAG+5 Workshop on Tree-Adjoining Grammar and Related Formalisms, pp. 199-206.
102. STONE, M., and C. DORAN. 1996. Paying heed to collocations. In Proceedings of the International Natural Language Generation Workshop, Herstmonceux, Sussex, UK, pp. 91-100.
103. STONE, M. and C. DORAN. 1997. Sentence planning as description using tree-adjoining grammar. In Proceedings of ACL, Madrid, pp. 198-205.
104. STONE, M., and B. WEBBER. 1998. Textual economy through close coupling of syntax and semantics. In Proceedings of the International Natural Language Generation Workshop, Niagara-on-the-lake, Canada, pp. 178-187.
105. TALMY, L. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12:49-100.
106. THOMASON, R. H. 1990. Accommodation, meaning and implicature. In Intentions in Communication. Edited by P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollack. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 325-363.
107. THOMASON, R. H., J. R. HOBBS, and J. MOORE. 1996. Communicative goals. In Proceedings of the ECAI Workshop on Gaps and Bridges: New Directions in Planning and Natural Language Generation, Budapest, Hungary, pp. 1124-1129.
108. THOMASON, R. H., and J. R. HOBBS. 1997. Interrelating interpretation and generation in an abductive framework. In Proceedings of the AAAI Fall Symposium on Communicative Action, Cambridge, MA.
109. USAF 1988. Organizational maintenance job guide. Fuel System Distribution, USAF Series F-16C/D Aircraft. Technical Order Manual, United States Air Force.
110. VAN DER SANDT, R. 1992. Presupposition projection as anaphora resolution. Journal of Semantics, 9(2):333-377.
111. VIJAY-SHANKER, K. 1987. A study of tree adjoining grammars, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
112. WAHLSTER, W., E. ANDRÉ, S. BANDYOPADHYAY, W. GRAF, and T. RIST. 1991. WIP: The coordinated generation of multimodal presentations from a common representation. In Computational Theories of Communication and Their Applications. Edited by O. Stock, J. Slack, and A. Ortony. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
113. WALKER, M. A. 1993. Informational redundancy and resource bounds in dialogue, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania. (Also available from, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, report IRCS-93-45.)
114. WANNER, L., and E. HOVY. 1996. The HealthDoc sentence planner. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Herstmonceux, Sussex, UK, pp. 1-10.
115. WARD, G. 1988. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Preposing. Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics. Garland, New York.
116. WEBBER, B. L., A. KNOTT, M. STONE, and A. JOSHI. 1999. Discourse relations: A structural and presuppositional account using lexicalised TAG. In Proceedings of ACL, College Park, MD, pp. 41-48.
117. WEBBER, B. L. 1988. Tense as discourse anaphor. Computational Linguistics, 14(2):61-73.
118. WEBBER, B. L., S. CARBERRY, J. R. CLARKE, A. GERTNER, T. HARVEY, R. RYMON, and R. WASHINGTON. 1998. Exploiting multiple goals and intentions in decision support for the management of multiple trauma: A review of the TraumAID project. Artificial Intelligence, 105:263-293.
119. XIA, F., M. PALMER, K. VIJAY-SHANKER, and J. ROSENZWEIG. 1998. Consistent grammar development using partial tree-descriptions for lexicalized tree-adjoining grammars. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Tree-Adjoining Grammar and Related Formalisms (TAG+4). Philadelphia, PA. Available as Technical Report 98-12, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania, pp. 180-183.
120. XTAG-Group 1995. A lexicalized tree adjoining grammar for English. Technical Report IRCS 95-03, University of Pennsylvania. (Updated version available at http://www.cis.upenn.edu/xtag/tr/tech-report.html.)
121. YAN, H. 2000. Paired speech and gesture generation in embodied conversational agents, Master's Thesis, MIT.
122. YANG, G., K. F. McCOY, and K. VIJAY-SHANKER. 1991. From functional specification to syntactic structures: Systemic grammar and tree-adjoining grammar. Computational Intelligence, 7(4):207-219.