A human-computer dialogue system for educational debate: A computational dialectics approach

International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 3-26

  Yuan, Tangming ^a   Moore, David ^b   Grierson, Alec ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AKUREYRI   (Iceland)

^b LEEDS METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Computational dialectics; Computational strategic heuristics; Dialogue model; Educational human computer debate

Indexed keywords

EID: 85013617571     PISSN: 15604292     EISSN: 15604306     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Amgoud, L., & Maudet, N. (2002). Strategical Considerations for Argumentative Agents. In S. Benferhat and E. Giunchiglia (Eds.) Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR’2002) Special Session on Argument, Dialogue, and Decision (pp. 409-417). Toulouse.
2. Amgoud, L., & Parsons, S. (2001). Agent Dialogue with Conflicting Preferences. In J.-J. C. Meyer & M. Tambe (Eds.) Intelligent Agents VIII: 8th International Workshop, ATAL 2001 (pp. 190-205). Berlin: Springer.
3. Baker, M. (2000). The Role and Models in Artificial Intelligence and Education Research: a Prospective View. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11(122), 143-.
4. Beck, J. E., & Stern, M. K. (1999). Bring Back the AI to AI & ED. In S.P. Lajoie & M. Vivet (Eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Education-Open Learning Environments: New Computational Technologies to Support Learning, Exploration, Collaboration (pp. 233-240). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
5. Bench-Capon, T. J. M. (1998). Specification and Implementation of Toulmin Dialogue Game. In J.C. Hage, T.J.M. Bench-Capon, A.W. Koers, C.N.J. de Vey Mestdagh & C.A.F.M. Gratters (Eds.) Legal Knowledge Based Systems: JURIX: The Eleventh Conference Proceedings (pp. 5-20). Nijmegen: Gerard Noodt Institute (GNI).
6. Bench-Capon, T. J. M., Geldard, T., & Leng, P. H. (2000). A Method for Computational Modelling of Dialectical Argument with Dialogue Games. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 8(233), 254-.
7. Bouwer, A. (1999). ArgueTrack: Computer Support for Educational Argumentation. In R. Pilkington, J. McKendree, H. Pain & P. Brna (Eds.) Proceedings of Workshop on Analysing Educational Dialogue Interaction (pp. 1-8). International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education 1999, Le Mans, France.
8. Copi, I. M., & Cohen C. (1994). Introduction to Logic. Prentice Hall.
9. Cumming, G., & McDougall, A. (2000). Mainstreaming AIED into Education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11(197), 207-.
10. Cunningham-Atkins, H., Powell, N., Moore, D., Hobbs, D., & Sharpe, S. (2004). The Role of Cognitive Style in Educational Computer Conferencing. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 69-80.
11. Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G., & Beale, R. (2004). Human Computer Interaction, third edition. Prentice Hall.
12. Ævarsson, K. (2006). Human-Computer Debating System, Evaluation and Development. Unpublished BSc. Dissertation. University of Akureyri, Iceland.
13. Freeman, K., & Farley, A. (1996). A Model of Argumentation and Its Application to Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 4(163), 197-.
14. Garrison, D. R. (1991). Critical Thinking and Adult Education: A Conceptual Model for Developing Critical Thinking in Adult Learners. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 10(4), 287-304.
15. Girle, R. A. (1992). Eliza and the Automata. In In Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference on AI Simulation and Planning in High Autonomy Systems (pp. 287-293). Perth.
16. Gordon, T. (1996). Computational Dialectics. In P. Hoschka (Ed.) Computers as Assistants-A New Generation of Support Systems (pp. 186-203). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Grasso, F., Cawsey, A., & Jones, R. (2000). Dialectical Argumentation to Solve Conflicts in Advice Giving: a Case Study in the Promotion of Healthy Nutrition. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 53(1077), 1115-.
18. Grasso, F., & Leng, P. (2003). Issues of Quality in Online Degree Programmes. In C. Ghaoui (Ed.) Usability Evaluation of Online Learning Programs (pp. 198-217). Information Science Publishing.
19. Hamblin, C. (1971). Mathematical Models of Dialogue. Theora, 37(130), 155-.
20. Hartley, J. R., & Hintze, D. (1990). Dialogue and Learner Modelling. In S. A. Cerri (Ed.) Student Model Acquisition in a Natural Laboratory (NATLAB), GEC DELTA Project D-1016 Final Report, Brussels.
21. Hatcher, D. (1999). Why Formal Logic is Essential for Critical Thinking. Informal Logic, 19(1), 77-89.
22. Krabbe, E. (1999). Profile of Dialogue. In J. Gerbrandy, M. Marx, M. de Rijke & Y. Venema (Eds.) JFAK: Essays Dedicated to Johan van Benthem on the Occasion of his 50th Birthday, III (pp. 25-36). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
23. Laurillard, D. (1995). Multimedia and the Changing Experience of the Learner. British Journal of Educational Technology, 26(3), 179-189.
24. Lodder, A. R., & Herczog, A. (1995). Dialaw, A Dialogue Framework for Modelling Legal Reasoning. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (pp.146-155). New York: ACM.
25. Mackenzie, J. (1979). Begging the Question in Non-Cumulative Systems. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8(117), 133-.
26. Mackenzie, J., & Staines, P. (1999). Hamblin’s Case for Commitment: A Reply to Johnson. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 32(1), 14-39.
27. Maudet, N. (2001). Notes on Relevance in Dialectical Systems. In A. Hunter & S. Parsons (Eds.) Proceeding of the ECSQARU’2001 Workshop Adventures in Argumentation (pp. 36-42). Toulouse.
28. Maudet, N., & Chaib-Draa, B. (2002). Commitment-Based and Dialogue-Game-Based Protocols: New Trends in Agent Communication Languages. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 17(2), 157-179.
29. Maudet, N., & Moore, D. (2001). Dialogue games as Dialogue Models for Interacting with, and via, Computers. Informal Logic, 21(3), 219-243.
30. McBurney, P., & Parsons, S. (2001). Agent Ludens: Games for Agent Dialogues. In P. Gmytrasiewicz & S. Parsons (Eds.) In Proceedings of the 2001 AAAI Spring Symposium on Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents (pp.70-77). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
31. Moore, D. (1993). Dialogue Game Theory for Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Leeds Metropolitan University.
32. Moore, D. (2000). A Framework for Using Multimedia within Argumentation Systems. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(2), 83-98.
33. Moore, D., & Hobbs, D. (1996). Computational Use of Philosophical Dialogue Theories. Informal Logic, 18(2), 131-163.
34. National Curriculum Council (1990a). Curriculum Guidance 7-Environmental Education. NCC, York.
35. National Curriculum Council (1990b). Curriculum Guidance 8-Education for Citizenship. NCC, York.
36. Pilkington, R. M. (1998). Dialogue games in Support of Qualitative Reasoning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(308), 320-.
37. Pilkington, R. M. (1999). Analysing Educational Discourse: the DISCOUNT Scheme, Version 3. Technical Report No. 99/2, Computer Based Learning Unit, The University of Leeds.
38. Pilkington, R. M., & Grierson, A. (1996). Generating Explanations in a Simulation-Based Learning Environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(5), 527-551.
39. Pilkington, R. M., & Mallen, C. (1996). Dialogue Games to Support Reasoning and Reflection in Diagnostic Tasks. In P. Brna, A. Paiva & J. Self (Eds.) Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 213-219). Lisbon: Editicöes Colibri.
40. Prakken, H. (2000). On Dialogue Systems with Speech Acts, Arguments, and Counterarguments. In Proceedings of the Seventh European Workshop on Logic for Artificial Intelligence (JELIA’2000) (pp. 224-238). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
41. Quinn, V. (1997). Critical Thinking in Young Minds. David Fulton Publishers.
42. Ravenscroft, A., & Matheson, P. (2001). Carpe Diem: Models and Methodologies for Designing Engaging and Interactive e-learning Discourse. In T. Okamoto, R. Hartley, Kinshuk & J. P. Klus (Eds.) Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technology: Issues, Achievements and Challenges (pp.74-77). IEEE Computer Society.
43. Ravenscroft, A., & Matheson, P. (2002). Developing and Evaluating Dialogue Games for Collaborative E-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(93), 101-.
44. Ravenscroft, A., & Pilkington, R. (2000). Investigate by Design: Dialogue Models to Support Reasoning and Conceptual Change. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11(237), 298-.
45. Reed, C. (1998). Dialogue Frames in Agent Communication. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Multi Agent Systems (ICMAS98) (pp.246-253). Paris: IEEE Press.
46. Self, J. (1992). Computational Viewpoints. In R. Moyse & M. T. Elsom-Cook (Eds.) Knowledge Negotiation. Academic Press.
47. Toulmin, S. (1958). he Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
48. Veerman, A., Andriessen, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2002). Collaborative Argumentation in Academic Education. Instructional Science, 30(155), 186-.
49. Walton, D. (1984). Logical Dialogue-Games and Fallacies. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.
50. Walton, D. (1996). Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Mahwah, N. J: Erlbaum Associates.
51. Walton, D. (1998). he New Dialectics: Conversational Context of Argument. University of Toronto Press.
52. Walton, D. (1999). Dialectical Relevance in Persuasion Dialogue. Informal Logic, 19(119), 143-.
53. Walton, D. (2000). The Place of Dialogue Theory in Logic, Computer Science and Communication Studies. Synthese, 123(327), 346-.
54. Walton, D., & Krabbe, E. (1995). Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press.
55. Yuan, T., Moore, D., & Grierson, A. (2003a). A Conversational Agents System as a Test-Bed to Study Philosophical Model "DC". In Proceedings of IJCAI’2003 Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (pp. 45-50). Acapulco, Mexico.
56. Yuan, T., Moore, D., & Grierson, A. (2003b). Computational Agents as a Test-Bed to Study Philosophical Model "DE", A Development of Mackenzie’s "DC". Informal Logic, 23(3), 263-284.
57. Yuan, T. (2004). Human-Computer Debate, a Computational Dialectics Approach. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Leeds Metropolitan University.