Individual and domain adaptation in sentence planning for dialogue

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Volumn 30, Issue , 2007, Pages 413-456

  Walker, Marilyn ^a   Stent, Amanda ^b   Mairesse, François ^a   Prasad, Rashmi ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b Stony Brook University   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION; KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION; LINGUISTICS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS; USER INTERFACES;

DIALOGUE CONTEXTS; SPOKEN DIALOGUE SYSTEMS;

FORMAL LANGUAGES;

EID: 38349188148     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10769757     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1613/jair.2329     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. André, E., Rist, T., van Mulken, S., Kiesen, M., & Baldes, S. (2000). Embodied Conversational Agents, chap. The automated design of believable dialogues for animated presentation teams, pp. 220-255. MIT Press.
2. Bangalore, S., & Rambow, O. (2000). Exploiting a probabilistic hierarchical model for generation. In Proc. of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics.
3. Barzilay, R., Elhadad, N., & McKeown, K. R. (2002). Inferring strategies for sentence ordering in multidocument news summarization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 17, 35-55.
4. Barzilay, R., & Lee, L. (2002). Bootstrapping lexical choice via multiple-sequence alignment. In Proc. of the Conference on Empirical Methods for Natural Language Processing.
5. Belz, A. (2005). Corpus-driven generation of weather forecasts. In Proc. 3rd Corpus Linguistics Conference.
6. Bouayad-Agha, N., Scott, D., & Power, R. (2000). Integrating content and style in documents: a case study of patient information leaflets. Information Design Journal, 9(2), 161-176.
7. Branigan, H., Pickering, M., & Cleland, A. (2000). Syntactic coordination in dialogue. Cognition, 75, B13-B25.
8. Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory And Cognition, 22(6), 1482-1493.
9. Brennan, S. E., Friedman, M. W., & Pollard, C. J. (1987). A centering approach to pronouns. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
10. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press.
11. Bulyko, I., & Ostendorf, M. (2001). Joint prosody prediction and unit selection for concatenative speech synthesis. In Proc. of the International Conference on Acoustic Speech and Signal Processing.
12. Carenini, G., & Moore, J. D. (2000). A strategy for generating evaluative arguments. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
13. Carenini, G., & Moore, J. D. (2006). Generating and evaluating evaluative arguments. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 170(11), 925-952.
14. Chai, J., Hong, P., Zhou, M., & Prasov, Z. (2004). Optimization in multimodal interpretation. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
15. Chu-Carroll, J., & Carberry, S. (1995). Response generation in collaborative negotiation. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
16. Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39.
17. Collins, M. (2000). Discriminative reranking for natural language parsing. In Proc. of the International Conference on Machine Learning.
18. Coulston, R., Oviatt, S., & Darves, C. (2002). Amplitude convergence in children's conversational speech with animated personas. In Proc. of the International Spoken Language Processing Conference.
19. Danlos, L. (2000). G-TAG: A lexicalized formalism for text generation inspired by tree adjoining grammar. In Abeillé, A., & Rainbow, O. (Eds.), Tree Adjoining Grammars: Formalisms, Linguistic Analysis, and Processing. CSLI Publications.
20. Di Eugenio, B., Moore, J. D., & Paolucci, M. (1997). Learning features that predict cue usage. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
21. DiMarco, C., & Foster, M. E. (1997). The automated generation of Web documents that are tailored to the individual reader. In Proc. of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Natural Language Processing on the World Wide Web.
22. Duboue, P. A., & McKeown, K. R. (2003). Statistical acquisition of content selection rules for natural language generation. In Proc. of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
23. Elhadad, N., Kan, M.-Y., Klavans, J., & McKeown, K. (2005). Customization in a unified framework for summarizing medical literature. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 33(2), 179-198.
24. Ferguson, S. H., & Kewley-Port, D. (2002). Vowel intelligibility in clear and conversational speech for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112(1), 259-271.
25. Fleischman, M., & Hovy, E. (2002). Emotional variation in speech-based natural language generation. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
26. Forbes, K., Miltsakaki, E., Prasad, R., Sarkar, A., Joshi, A., & Webber, B. (2003). DLTAG system: Discourse parsing with a lexicalized tree adjoining grammar. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 12(3), 261-279.
27. Freund, Y., Iyer, R., Schapire, R., & Singer, Y. (1998). An efficient boosting algorithm for combining preferences. In Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference. Extended version available from http://www.research.att.com/ schapire.
28. Garrod, S., & Anderson, A. (1987). Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic coordination. Cognition, 27, 181-218.
29. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
30. Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2), 203-225.
31. Guo, H., & Stent, A. (2005). Trainable adapatable multimedia presentation generation. In Proc. of the International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces. Demo paper.
32. Gupta, S., Walker, M., & Romano, D. (2007). How rude are you?: Evaluating politeness and affect in interaction. In Proc. of the Second International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction.
33. Gupta, S., & Stent, A. (2005). Automatic evaluation of referring expression generation using corpora. In Proc. of the Workshop on Using Corpora in Natural Language Generation.
34. Hardt, D., & Rambow, O. (2001). Generation of VP ellipsis: A corpus-based approach. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
35. Higashinaka, R., Walker, M., & Prasad, R. (2007). An unsupervised method for learning generation lexicons for spoken dialogue systems by mining user reviews. ACM Transactions on Speech and Language Processing, 4(4).
36. Hovy, E. (1987). Some pragmatic decision criteria in generation. In Kempen, G. (Ed.), Natural Language Generation, pp. 3-17. Martinus Nijhoff.
37. Isard, A., Brockmann, C., & Oberlander, J. (2006). Individuality and alignment in generated dialogues. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
38. Johnston, M., Bangalore, S., Vasireddy, G., Stent, A., Ehlen, P., Walker, M., Whittaker, S., & Maloor, P. (2002). MATCH: An architecture for multimodal dialogue systems. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
39. Jokinen, K., & Kanto, K. (2004). User expertise modelling and adaptivity in a speech-based e-mail system. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
40. Jordan, P., & Walker, M. (2005). Learning content selection rules for generating object descriptions in dialogue. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 24, 157-194.
41. Joshi, A. K., Webber, B., & Weischedel, R. M. (1986). Some aspects of default reasoning in interactive discourse. Tech. rep. MS-CIS-86-27, University of Pennsylvania.
42. Joshi, A. K., Webber, B. L., & Weischedel, R. M. (1984). Preventing false inferences. In Proc. of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics.
43. Jungers, M. K., Palmer, C., & Speer, S. R. (2002). Time after time: The coordinating influence of tempo in music and speech. Cognitive Processing, 1-2, 21-35.
44. Kittredge, R., Korelsky, T., & Rambow, O. (1991). On the need for domain communication knowledge. Computational Intelligence, 7(4), 305-314.
45. Kothari, A. (2007). Accented pronouns and unusual antecedents: A corpus study. In Proc. of the 8th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue.
46. Langkilde, I., & Knight, K. (1998). Generation that exploits corpus-based statistical knowledge. In Proc. of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics and Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
47. Langkilde-Geary, I. (2002). An empirical verification of coverage and correctness for a general-purpose sentence generator. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
48. Lapata, M. (2003). Probabilistic text structuring: Experiments with sentence ordering. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
49. Lavoie, B., & Rambow, O. (1997). A fast and portable realizer for text generation systems. In Proc. of the Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing.
50. Levelt, W. J. M., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 78-106.
51. Lin, J. (2006). Using distributional similarity to identify individual verb choice. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
52. Litman, D. (1996). Cue phrase classification using machine learning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 5, 53-94.
53. Luchok, J. A., & McCroskey, J. C. (1978). The effect of quality of evidence on attitude change and source credibility. The Southern Speech Communication Journal, 43, 371-383.
54. Madigan, D., Genkin, A., Lewis, D., Argamon, S., Fradkin, D., & Ye, L. (2005). Author identification on the large scale. In Proc. of the Meeting of the Classification Society of North America.
55. Mairesse, F., & Walker, M. (2007). PERSONAGE: Personality generation for dialogue. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
56. Mairesse, F., & Walker, M. (2005). Learning to personalize spoken generation for dialogue systems. In Proc. Interspeech.
57. Mann, W., & Thompson, S. (1987). Rhetorical structure theory: Description and construction of text structures. In Kempen, G. (Ed.), Natural Language Generation, pp. 83-96. Martinus Nijhoff.
58. Marciniak, T., & Strube, M. (2004). Classification-based generation using TAG. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
59. Marcu, D. (1996). Building up rhetorical structure trees. In Proc. of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence.
60. Marcu, D. (1997). From local to global coherence: a bottom-up approach to text planning. In Proc. of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
61. McCoy, K. F. (1989). Generating context-sensitive responses to object related misconceptions. Artificial Intelligence, 41 (2), 157-195.
62. McKeown, K., Kukich, K., & Shaw, J. (1994). Practical issues in automatic document generation. In Proc. of the Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing.
63. McKeown, K. R. (1985). Discourse strategies for generating natural language text. Artificial Intelligence, 27(1), 1-42.
64. Mellish, C., O'Donnell, M., Oberlander, J., & Knott, A. (1998). An architecture for opportunistic text generation. In Proc. of the Ninth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation.
65. Melčuk, I. A. (1988). Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice. State University of New York Press, Albany, New York.
66. Moore, J. D., & Paris, C. L. (1993). Planning text for advisory dialogues: Capturing intentional and rhetorical information. Computational Linguistics, 19(4), 651-694.
67. Moore, J. D., Foster, M. E., Lemon, O., & White, M. (2004). Generating tailored, comparative descriptions in spoken dialogue. In Proc. of the Seventeenth International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference.
68. Nakatsu, C., & White, M. (2006). Learning to say it well: Reranking realizations by predicted synthesis quality. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
69. Nenkova, A., Passonneau, R. J., & McKeown, K. (2007). The pyramid method: incorporating human content selection variation in summarization evaluation. ACM Transactions on Speech and Language Processing, 4(2).
70. Oberlander, J., & Brew, C. (2000). Stochastic text generation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 358, 1373-1385.
71. Paiva, D. S., & Evans, R. (2004). A framework for stylistically controlled generation. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
72. Pantel, P., Ravichandran, D., & Hovy, E. (2004). Towards terascale knowledge acquisition. In Proc. of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics.
73. Papenini, K., Roukos, S., Ward, T., & Zhu, W.-J. (2002). Bleu: A method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
74. Pennebaker, J. W., & King, L. A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1296-1312.
75. Piwek, P. (2003). A flexible pragmatics-driven language generator for animated agents. In Proc. of the European Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
76. Polifroni, J., & Walker, M. (2006). An analysis of automatic content selection algorithms for spoken dialogue system summaries. In Proc. of the IEEE/ACL Conference on Spoken Language Technology.
77. Porayska-Pomsta, K., & Mellish, C. (2004). Modelling politeness in natural language generation. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
78. Prasad, R., Joshi, A., Dinesh, N., Lee, A., & Miltsakaki, E. (2005). The Penn Discourse TreeBank as a resource for natural language generation. In Proc. of the Corpus Linguistics Workshop on Using Corpora for Natural Language Generation.
79. Prevost, S. (1995). A Semantics of Contrast and Information Structure for Specifying Intonation in Spoken Language Generation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
80. Prince, E. F. (1985). Fancy syntax and shared knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics, 9(1), 65-81.
81. Rambow, O., Rogati, M., & Walker, M. (2001). Evaluating a trainable sentence planner for a spoken dialogue travel system. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
82. Rambow, O., & Korelsky, T. (1992). Applied text generation. In Proc. of the Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing.
83. Reiter, E. (2002). Should corpora be gold standards for NLG?. In Proc. of the International Natural Language Generation Conference.
84. Reiter, E., & Dale, R. (2000). Building Natural Language Generation Systems. Cambridge University Press.
85. Reiter, E., & Sripada, S. (2002). Human variation and lexical choice. Computational Linguistics, 28, 545-553.
86. Reiter, E., Sripada, S., & Robertson, R. (2003). Acquiring correct knowledge for natural language generation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 18, 491-516.
87. Reitter, D., Keller, F., & Moore, J. D. (2006). Computational modeling of structural priming in dialogue. In Proc. of the Joint Conference on Human Language Technologies and Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
88. Rich, E. (1979). User modelling via stereotypes. Cognitive Science, 3, 329-354.
89. Scott, D. R., & de Souza, C. S. (1990). Getting the message across in RST-based text generation. In Dale, R., Mellish, C., & Zock, M. (Eds.), Current Research in Natural Language Generation, pp. 47-73. Academic Press.
90. Snyder, B., & Barzilay, R. (2007). Database-text alignment via structured multilabel classification. In Proc. of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
91. Stenchikova, S., & Stent, A. (2007). Measuring adaptation between dialogs. In Proc. of the 8th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue.
92. Stent, A., & Guo, H. (2005). A new data-driven approach for multimedia presentation generation. In Proc. EuroIMSA.
93. Stent, A., Prasad, R., & Walker, M. (2004). Trainable sentence planning for complex information presentation in spoken dialog systems. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
94. Stent, A., Walker, M., Whittaker, S., & Maloor, P. (2002). User-tailored generation for spoken dialogue: An experiment. In Proc. of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing.
95. Wahlster, W., & Kobsa, A. (1989). User models in dialogue systems. In User Models in Dialogue Systems, pp. 4-34. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
96. Walker, M., Rambow, O., & Rogati, M. (2002). Training a sentence planner for spoken dialogue using boosting. Computer Speech and Language: Special Issue on Spoken Language Generation, 16(3-4), 409-433.
97. Walker, M. A., Cahn, J. E., & Whittaker, S. J. (1997). Improvising linguistic style: Social and affective bases for agent personality. In Proc. of the First Conference on Automous Agents.
98. Walker, M. A., et al. (2002). DARPA communicator: Cross-system results for the 2001 evaluation. In Proc. of the International Spoken Language Processing Conference.
99. Walker, M. A., et al. (2004). Generation and evaluation of user tailored responses in multimodal dialogue. Cognitive Science, 28(5), 811-840.
100. Webber, B., Knott, A., Stone, M., & Joshi, A. (1999). What are little trees made of?: A structural and presuppositional account using lexicalized tag. In Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
101. Yeh, C.-L., & Mellish, C. (1997). An empirical study on the generation of anaphora in Chinese. Computational Linguistics, 23-1, 169-190.
102. Zukerman, I., & Litman, D. (2001). Natural language processing and user modeling: Synergies and limitations. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11(1-2), 129-158.