Learning to interpret utterances using dialogue history

EACL 2009 - 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 184-192

  De Vault, David ^a   Stone, Matthew ^b  

^a University of Southern California   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMBIGUITY RESOLUTION; HUMAN ANNOTATIONS; MAXIMUM ENTROPY MODELS; REFERENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS; TASK-ORIENTED; TRAINING EXAMPLE;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

EID: 84863704065     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3115/1609067.1609087     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. Adam L. Berger, Stephen Delia Pietra, and Vincent J. Delia Pietra. 1996. A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Computational Linguistics, 22(1): 39-71.
2. Avrim Blum and Tom Mitchell. 1998. Combining labeled and unlabeled data with co-training. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference on Computational Learning Theory, pages 92-100.
3. Dan Bohus, Xiao Li, Patrick Nguyen, and Geoffrey Zweig. 2008. Learning n-best correction models from implicit user feedback in a multi-modal local search application. In The 9th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue.
4. Susan E. Brennan and Herbert H. Clark. 1996. Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22(6): 1482-1493.
5. Herbert H. Clark and Deanna Wilkes-Gibbs. 1986. Referring as a collaborative process. In Philip R. Cohen, Jerry Morgan, and Martha E. Pollack, editors, Intentions in Communication, pages 463-493. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1990.
6. Paul R. Cohen, Tim Oates, Carole R. Beal, and Niall Adams. 2002. Contentful mental states for robot baby. In Eighteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence, pages 126-131, Menlo Park, CA, USA. American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
7. David De Vault and Matthew Stone. 2007. Managing ambiguities across utterances in dialogue. In Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (Decalog 2007), pages 49-56.
8. David DeVault. 2008. Contribution Tracking: Participating in Task-Oriented Dialogue under Uncertainty. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.
9. Barbara Di Eugenio, Pamela W. Jordan, Richmond H. Thomason, and Johanna D. Moore. 2000. The agreement process: An empirical investigation of human-human computer-mediated collaborative dialogue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53: 1017-1076.
10. Darren Gergle, Carolyn P. Rosé, and Robert E. Kraut. 2007. Modeling the impact of shared visual information on collaborative reference. In CHI 2007 Proceedings, pages 1543-1552.
11. Patrick G. T. Healey and Greg J. Mills. 2006. Participation, precedence and co-ordination in dialogue. In Proceedings of Cognitive Science, pages 1470-1475.
12. Jerry R. Hobbs, Mark Stickel, Douglas Appelt, and Paul Martin. 1993. Interpretation as abduction. Artificial Intelligence, 63: 69-142.
13. Pamela W. Jordan and Marilyn A. Walker. 2005. Learning content selection rules for generating object descriptions in dialogue. JAIR, 24: 157-194.
14. Andrew McCallum. 2002. MALLET: A MAchine learning for LanguagE toolkit. http://mallet.cs.umass.edu.
15. Jorge Nocedal. 1980. Updating quasi-newton matrices with limited storage. Mathematics of Computation, 35(151): 773-782.
16. Tim Oates, Zachary Eyler-Walker, and Paul R. Cohen. 2000. Toward natural language interfaces for robotic agents. In Proc. Agents, pages 227-228.
17. Massimo Poesio and Ron Artstein. 2005. Annotating (anaphoric) ambiguity. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference.
18. Massimo Poesio and Renata Vieira. 1998. A corpus-based investigation of definite description use. Computational Linguistics, 24(2): 183-216.
19. Deb Roy and Alex Pentland. 2002. Learning words from sights and sounds: A computational model. Cognitive Science, 26(1): 113-146.
20. Matthew Saxton, Carmel Houston-Price, and Natasha Dawson. 2005. The prompt hypothesis: clarification requests as corrective input for grammatical errors. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26(3): 393-414.
21. David Schlangen and Raquel Fernandez. 2007. Speaking through a noisy channel: Experiments on inducing clarification behaviour in human-human dialogue. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2007.
22. Luc Steels and Tony Belpaeme. 2005. Coordinating perceptually grounded categories through language, a case study for colour. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(4): 469-529.
23. Richmond H. Thomason, Matthew Stone, and David DeVault. 2006. Enlightened update: A computational architecture for presupposition and other pragmatic phenomena. For the Ohio State Pragmatics Initiative, 2006, available at http://www.research.rutgers.edu/~ddevault/.
24. Ellen M. Vorhees. 1999. The TREC-8 question answering track report. In Proceedings of the 8th Text Retrieval Conference, pages 77-82.
25. Jason Williams and Steve Young. 2007. Partially observable markov decision processes for spoken dialog systems. Computer Speech and Language, 21(2): 393-422.
26. Chen Yu and Dana H. Ballard. 2004. A multimodal learning interface for grounding spoken language in sensory perceptions. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 1: 57-80.