Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Model for Adapting Explanations to the User's Likely Inferences

  • Published:
User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to generate natural, high quality textual presentations in technical domains, good explanations must not only be adapted to the knowledge attributed to the intended audience, but they must also take into account the inferential capabilities of the addressees. In this paper, we present a model for anticipating contextually-motivated inferences addressees are likely to draw. This model is used to motivate choices in presenting or omitting individual pieces of information; it takes into account the addressees' domain expertise and expectations about logical consequences of purposefully presented information. Several kinds of empirical evidence are incorporated into a text planning process that aims at exploiting conversational implicature, so that a most suitable portion of the plan can be selected for being uttered explicitly. This way, our method adds to discourse planners based on Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) the ability to omit easily inferable information. Thus, it overcomes one of the main shortcomings of RST. In the course of this process, rules anticipating user inferences are invoked to determine contextually justified derivability of information. In this manner, text variants can be composed on the basis of a text plan entailing annotations about the inferability of pieces of information. Moreover, pragmatically-motivated preference criteria can be used to choose among several plausible variants. The model is formulated in a reasonably domain-independent way, so that the rules expressing aspects of conversational implicature can be incorporated into typical RST-based text planners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Appelt, D.: 1985, ‘Planning English Sentences’. Cambridge University Press.

  • Bateman, J. and Paris, C.: 1989, ‘Phrasing a Text in Terms the User can Understand’. In: Proceeding of IJCAI-89, Detroit, 1511-1517.

  • Carberry, S.: 1988, ‘Modeling the User's Plans and Goals’. In: Computational Linguistics 14(3), 23-37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J.: 1990, ‘The Nurnberg Funnel: Designing Minimalist Instruction for Practical Computer Skill’. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cawsey, A.: 1990, ‘Generating Explanatory Discourse’. In: R. Dale, C. Mellish, M. Zock (eds): Current Issues in Natural Language Generation, Academic Press, 75-102.

  • Garnham, A.: 1982, ‘Testing Psychological Theories about Inference Making’. In: Memory and Cognition 10(4), 341-349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, N. and Carberry, S.: 1994, ‘A Hybrid Reasoning Model for Indirect Answers’. In: Proceedings of ACL-94, Las Cruces, New Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H.: 1975, ‘Logic and Conversation’. In: Syntax and Semantics: Vol 3 , Speech Acts, Academic Press, 43-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschberg, J.: 1991, ‘A Theory of Scalar Implicature’. Garland Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horacek, H.: 1991, ‘Exploiting Conversational Implicature for Generating Concise Explanations’. In: J. Kunze, D. Reimann (eds): Proceedings of EACL-91, Berlin, 191-193.

  • Horacek, H.: 1992, ‘Explanations for Constraint Systems’. In: B. Neumann (ed): Proceedings of ECAI-92, Vienna, 500-504.

  • Horacek, H.: 1994, ‘How to Avoid Explaining Obvious Things (Without Omitting Central Information)’. In: T. Cohn (ed): Proceedings of ECAI-94, Amsterdam, 520-524.

  • Joshi, A., Webber, B. and Weischedel, R.: 1984, ‘Living Up to Expectations: Computing Expert Responses’. In: Proceedings of AAAI-84, Austin, Texas, 169-175.

  • Karbach, W., Linster, M. and Voß, A.: 1989, ‘OFFICE-PLAN: Tackling the Synthesis Frontier’. In: D. Metzing (ed.): Proceedings of GWAI-89, Springer, Berlin, 379-387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass, R. and Finin, T.: 1987, ‘Rules for the Implicit Acquisition of Knowledge about the User’. In: Proceedings of AAAI-87, Seattle, WA, 295-300.

  • Kintsch, W., Keenan, J. and McKoon, G.: 1974, ‘Memory for Information Inferred During Reading’. In: W. Kintsch (ed.): The Representation of Meaning in Memory, Earlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobsa, A.: 1990, ‘Modeling a User's Conceptual Knowledge in BGP-MS, a User Modeling Shell System’. In: Computational Intelligence 6, 193-208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobsa, A., Müller, D. and Nill, A.: 1994, ‘KN-AHS: An Adaptive Hypertext Client of the User Modeling System BGP-MS’. In: A. Kobsa (ed.): Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on User Modeling, Hyannis, MA, 99-105.

  • Lascarides, A. and Oberlander, J.: 1992, ‘Abducting Temporal Discourse’. In: R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. Rösner, O. Stock (eds): Aspects of Automated Language Generation, Springer, Berlin, 167-182.

  • Litman, D. and Allen, J.: 1987, ‘A Plan Recognition Model for Subdialogues in Conversation’. In: Cognitive Science 11, 163–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, E. and Hovy, E.: 1993, ‘Organizing Discourse Structure Relations Using Metafunctions’. In: H. Horacek, M. Zock (eds): New Concepts in Natural Language Generation, Pinter, London, 69–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, W. and Thompson, S.: 1987, ‘Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization’. In: L. Polanyi (ed.): The Structure of Discourse, Norwood, Ablex.

  • McKeown, K: 1985, ‘Discourse Strategies for Generating Natural Language Text’. In: Artificial Intelligence 27, 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, J.: 1991, ‘Ein Algorithmus zur Erzeugung konversationeller Implikaturen’. DIAMOD-Report Nr. 9, University of Bielefeld.

  • Moore, J.: 1989, ‘A Reactive Approach to Explanation in Expert and Advice-Giving Systems’. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. and Paris, C.: 1989, ‘Planning Text for Advisory Dialogs’. In: Proceedings of ACL-89, Vancouver, 203–211.

  • Moore, J. and Paris, C.: 1992, ‘Exploiting User Feedback to Compensate for the Unreliability of User Models’. In: User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 2(4), 287-330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. and Paris, C.: 1993, ‘Planning Text for Advisory Dialogs: Capturing Intentional and Rhetorical Information’. In: Computational Linguistics 19(4), 651-694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. and Swartout, W.: 1989, ‘A Reactive Approach to Explanation’. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-89, Detroit, 1504-1510.

  • Nielsen, J.: 1994, ‘Estimating the Number of Subjects Needed for a Thinking Aloud Test’. In: International Journal of Human Computer Studies 41, 385-397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, C.: 1988, ‘Tailoring Object Descriptions to a User's Level of Expertise’. In: Computational Linguistics 14, 64-78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, C.: 1993, ‘User Modeling in Text Generation’. Pinter, London.

  • Peter, G. and Rösner, D.: 1994, ‘User-Model-Driven Generation of Instructions’. In: User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 3, 289-319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, K.: 1993, ‘Generierung natürlichsprachlicher Erklärungen in DIAMOD - Eine Systembeschreibung’. DIAMOD-Report Nr. 24, University of Bielefeld.

  • Reiter, E.: 1990, ‘Generating Descriptions that Exploit a User's Domain Knowledge’. In: R. Dale, C. Mellish, M. Zock (eds): Current Issues in Natural Language Generation, Academic Press, 257-285.

  • Rösner, D.: 1993, ‘Intentions, Rhetoric, or Discourse Relations? A Case from Multilingual Document Generation’. In: O. Rambow (ed.): Intentionality and Structure in Discourse Relations, Workshop held at the ACL-93, Columbus, Ohio, 106-109.

  • Sprenger, M.: 1993, ‘Explanation Strategies for KADS-Based Expert Systems’. In: H. Horacek, M. Zock (eds): New Concepts in Natural Language Generation, Pinter, London, 27-56.

  • Thüring, M. and Wender, K.: 1985, ‘Über kausale Inferenzen beim Lesen’. In: Sprache und Kognition 2, 76-86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, J.: 1980, ‘BLAH, A System Which Explains its Reasoning’. In: Artificial Intelligence 15, 19-48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zukerman, I. and McConachy, R.: 1993, ‘Generating Concise Discourse that Addresses a User's Inferences’. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-93, Chambery, France, 1202-1207.

  • Zukerman, I. and McConachy, R.: 1994a, ‘Discourse Planning as an Optimization Process’. In: Proceedings of 7th International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Kennebunkport, Massachusetts, 37-44.

  • Zukerman, I. and McConachy, R.: 1994b, ‘Being Concise Versus Being Shallow: Two Competing Discourse Paradigms’. In: Proceedings of ECAI-94, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 515-519.

  • Zukerman, I. and McConachy, R.: 1995, ‘Generating Discourse Across Several User Models: Maximizing Belief while Avoiding Boredom and Overload’. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-95, Montreal, Canada, 1251-1257.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LILI-Fakultät, Universität Bielefeld, Postfach 100 131, D-33501, Bielefeld, Germany

    HELMUT Horacek

Authors
  1. HELMUT Horacek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Horacek, H. A Model for Adapting Explanations to the User's Likely Inferences. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 7, 1–55 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008297401272

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008297401272

Search

Navigation