How to build explanations of automated proofs a methodology and requirements on domain representations

AAAI Workshop - Technical Report

Volumn WS-07-06, Issue , 2007, Pages 34-41

  Horacek, Helmut ^a  

^a SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATED PROOFS; AUTOMATED THEOREM PROVERS; CONTENT SPECIFICATIONS; DOMAIN REPRESENTATIONS; PROBLEM-SOLVING METHODS; TECHNICAL REPORTS; TRANSFORMATION PROCESSES; WORKING GROUP;

INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS; SPECIFICATIONS;

COMMUNICATION;

EID: 51849090466     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. Di Eugenio, B.; Fossati, D.; Yu, D.; Haller, S.; and Glass, M. 2005. Aggregation Improves Learning: Experiments in Natural Language Generation for Intelligent Tutoring Systems. In Proceedings of the 43rd Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-05), 50-57.
2. Fiedler, A. 2001. Dialog-Driven Adaptation of Explanations of Proofs. In Proceedings of 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-2001), 1295-1300, Morgan Kaufman.
3. Fehrer, D.; and Horacek, H. 1999. Presenting Inequations in Mathematical Proofs. Information Sciences 116:3-23.
4. Fowler, M. 1999. Refactoring, Improving the Design of Existing Code. Addison-Wesley.
5. Green, N.; and Carberry, S. 1999. Interpreting and Generating Indirect Answers. Computational Linguistics 25(3):389-435.
6. Horacek, H. 1998. Generating Inference-Rich Discourse Through Revisions of RST Trees. In Proceedings of 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-98), 814-820. Menlo Park, Calif.: AAAI Press.
7. Horacek, H. 1999. Presenting Proofs in a Human-Oriented Way. In Proceedings of CADE-16 (Conference on Autotated Deduction), 142-156. Springer LNAI1632.
8. Horacek, H. 2000. Tailoring Inference-rich Descriptions through Making Compromises between Conflicting Cooperation Principles. Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 53:1117-1146.
9. Horacek, H. 2001. Expressing References to Rules in Proof Presentations. In Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR-2001 (short paper), 76-85.
10. Horacek, H.; Fiedler, A.; Franke, A.; Moschner, M.; Pollet, M.; and Sorge, V. 2004. Representing of Mathematical Concepts for Inferencing and for Presentation Purposes. Cybernetics and Systems'2004, 683-688.
11. Horacek, H. 2006. Handling Dependencies in Reorganizing Content Specifications. Research on Language and Computation 4:111-139.
12. Horacek, H.; and Wolska, M. 2006. Interpreting SemiFormal Utterances in Dialogs about Mathematical Proofs. Data & Knowledge Engineering 58(1):90-106.
13. Horacek, H.; and Wolska, M. 2007. Generating Responses to Formally Flawed Problem-Solving Statements. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED-07). Forthcoming.
14. Huang, X. 1994. Reconstructing Proofs at the Assertional Level. In Proceedings of CADE-I2 (Conference on Automated Deduction), 738-752. Springer LNAI814.
15. Huang, X.; and Fiedler, A. 1997. Proof Verbalization as an Application of NLG. In Proceedings of 15th International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-97). 965-970, Morgan Kaufman.
16. Johnson-Laird, P.; and Byrne, R. 1990. Deduction. Ablex Publishing.
17. Kittredge R.; Korelsky, T.; and Rambow, O. 1991. On the Need for Domain Communication Knowledge. Computational Intelligence 7(4):305-314.
18. McCune, W 1994. Otter 3.0. Reference Manual and Guide. Technical Report ANL-94/6, Argonne National Laboratory.
19. Meier, A. 2000. TRAMP: Transformation of Machine-Found Proofs into Natural Deduction Proofs at the Assertion Level. In Proceedings of CADE-17 (Conference on Automated Deduction), 460-464. Springer LNAI1831.
20. Melis, E.; and Siekmann, J. 1999. Knowledge-Based Proof Planning. Artificial Intelligence 115(1):65-105.
21. Mellish, C.; and Evans, R. 1989. Natural Language Generation from Plans. Computational Linguistics 15(4):233-249.
22. Moore, J.; and Swartout, B. 1989. A Reactive Approach to Explanations. In Proceedings of 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-89), 1504-1510. Morgan Kaufman,
23. Reiter, E. 1994. Has a Consensus NL Architecture Appeared, and is it Psycholinguistically Plausible? In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, 163-170.
24. Sadock, J. 1977. Modus Brevis: The Truncated Argument. In Papers from the 13th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, 545-554.
25. Stickel, M. 1986. Schubert's Steamroller Problem: Formulations and Solutions. Journal of Automated Reasoning 2(1):89-101.
26. Swartout, W.; Paris, C.; and Moore, J. 1991. Design for Explainable Expert Systems. IEEE Expert 6(3):59-64.
27. Thüring, M.; and Wender, K. 1985. Über kausale Inferenzen beim Lesen. Sprache und Kognition 2:76-86.
28. Walker, M. 1996. The Effect of Resource Limits and Task Complexity on Collaborative Planning in Dialogue. Artificial Intelligence 85:181-243.
29. Zukerman, I.; and McConachy, R. 1993. Generating Concise Discourse that Addresses a User's Inferences. In Proceedings of 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-93), 1202-1207. Morgan Kaufman.