Can i finish? Learning when to respond to incremental interpretation results in interactive dialogue

Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2009 Conference: 10th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 11-20

  DeVault, David ^a   Sagae, Kenji ^a   Traum, David ^a  

^a Institute for Creative Technologies ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIALOGUE SYSTEMS; HUMAN DIALOGUES; INCREMENTAL INTERPRETATION; PROTOTYPE IMPLEMENTATIONS;

SPEECH PROCESSING;

SWITCHING CIRCUITS;

EID: 84857770480     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Jens Allwood, Joakim Nivre, and Elisabeth Ahlsen. 1992. On the semantics and pragmatics of linguistic feedback. Journal of Semantics, 9.
2. Jens Allwood. 1995. An activity based approach to pragmatics. Technical Report (GPTL) 75, Gothenburg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics, University of Göteborg.
3. Adam L. Berger, Stephen D. Della Pietra, and Vincent J. D. Della Pietra. 1996. A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Computational Linguistics, 22(1):39-71.
4. Justine Cassell, Joseph Sullivan, Scott Prevost, and Elizabeth Churchill, editors. 2000. Embodied Conversational Agents. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
5. Herbert H. Clark and Edward F. Schaefer. 1987. Collaborating on contributions to conversation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2:1-23.
6. Herbert H. Clark and Deanna Wilkes-Gibbs. 1986. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1-39. Also appears as Chapter 4 in (Clark, 1992).
7. Herbert H. Clark. 1992. Arenas of Language Use. University of Chicago Press.
8. B. Hansen, D. Novick, and S. Sutton. 1996. Prevention and repair of breakdowns in a simple task domain. In Proceedings of the AAAI-96 Workshop on Detecting, Repairing, and Preventing Human-Machine Miscommunication, pages 5-12.
9. A. Hartholt, T. Russ, D. Traum, E. Hovy, and S. Robinson. 2008. A common ground for virtual humans: Using an ontology in a natural language oriented virtual human architecture. In Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC), May.
10. A. Leuski and D. Traum. 2008. A statistical approach for text processing in virtual humans. In 26th Army Science Conference.
11. Yukiko I. Nakano, Gabe Reinstein, Tom Stocky, and Justine Cassell. 2003. Towards a model of face-to-face grounding. In ACL, pages 553-561.
12. Jeff Rickel and W. Lewis Johnson. 1999. Virtual humans for team training in virtual reality. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pages 578-585. IOS Press.
13. H. Sacks, E. A. Schegloff, and G. Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turntaking for conversation. Language, 50:696-735.
14. M. D. Sadek. 1991. Dialogue acts are rational plans. In Proceedings of the ESCA/ETR workshop on multi-modal dialogue.
15. K. Sagae, G. Christian, D. DeVault, and D. R. Traum. 2009. Towards natural language understanding of partial speech recognition results in dialogue systems. In Short Paper Proceedings of NAACL HLT.
16. Gabriel Skantze and David Schlangen. 2009. Incremental dialogue processing in a micro-domain. In Proceedings of EACL 2009, pages 745-753.
17. D. Traum, W. Swartout, J. Gratch, and S. Marsella. 2008a. A virtual human dialogue model for nonteam interaction. In L. Dybkjaer and W. Minker, editors, Recent Trends in Discourse and Dialogue. Springer.
18. D. R. Traum, S. Marsella, J. Gratch, J. Lee, and A. Hartholt. 2008b. Multi-party, multi-issue, multi-strategy negotiation for multi-modal virtual agents. In Helmut Prendinger, James C. Lester, and Mitsuru Ishizuka, editors, IVA, volume 5208 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 117-130. Springer.
19. I. H. Witten and E. Frank. 2005. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann.
20. Victor H. Yngve. 1970. On getting a word in edgewise. In Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting, pages 567-78. Chicago Linguistic Society.