Advertisement

Question Answering As Dialogue With Data

  • Tomek Strzalkowski
  • Sharon Small
  • Hilda Hardy
  • Paul Kantor
  • Wu Min
  • Sean Ryan
  • Nobuyuki Shimizu
  • Liu Ting
  • Nina Wacholder
  • Boris Yamrom
Part of the Text, Speech and Language Technology book series (TLTB, volume 32)

We describe an interactive approach to question answering where the user and the system first negotiate the scope and shape of information being sought and then cooperate in locating and assembling the answer. The system, which we call HITIQA11, has access to a large repository of unprocessed and unformatted data, and is additionally equipped with limited capabilities to search and navigate this set. The user asks questions in English, for example “What are the effects of pollution on commercial fishing on the Black Sea?” Mediating between the data and the user is a Dialogue Management System that attempts to make some sense of what the user is asking and what can be retrieved from the database, and then reconcile these through a dialogue. The purpose of the Dialogue Manager is to make the communication between the human and the machine possible and as efficient as it can be, but it does not necessarily imply a full understanding thus leaving the initiative fully in user’s hands. The HITIQA system has been designed primarily for information analysts who require answers to complex, analytical questions, not just finding simple facts.

Keywords

Data Frame Question Answering Generic Frame Dialogue System Defense Advance Research Project Agency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

15. References

  1. Aist, Gregory, John Dowding, Beth Ann Hockey and Jim Hieronymus. 2002. A Demonstration of a Spoken Dialogue Interface to an Intelligent Procedure Assistant for Astronaut Training and Support Proceedings of the ACL-2002. pp. 83-84Google Scholar
  2. Allen, J.F. 1979. A Plan Based Approach to Speech Act Recognition. TR University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, J. and M. Core. 1997. Draft of DAMSL: Dialog Act Markup in Several Layers. http://www.cs.rochester.edu/research/cisd/resources/damsl/AMITIÉS Project. 2003. http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/nlp/AMITIÉS/
  4. Bagga, A., T. Strzalkowski, and G.B. Wise. 2000. PartsID: A Dialog-Based System for Identifying Parts for Medical Systems. Proc. of the ANLP-NAACL-2. Google Scholar
  5. Buckley, Chris. May 1985. Implementation of the Smart information retrieval system. Technical Report TR85-686, Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  6. Bunt, H.C. Dynamic Interpretation and Dialogue Theory. In M. Taylor, D. Bouwhuis, F. Neel, eds., The Structure of Multimodal Dialogue, volume 2. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. Callan, James, P., W. Bruce Croft, Stephen M. Harding 1992. The INQUERY Retrieval System. Proc. of DEXA-92, 3rd International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications. 78-83.Google Scholar
  8. Cunningham, H., D. Maynard, K. Bontcheva, V. Tablan and Y. Wilks. 2000 Experience of using GATE for NLP R&D. In Coling 2000 Workshop on Using Toolsets and Architectures To Build NLP Systems. Google Scholar
  9. DARPA Communicator Program. 2002. http://www.darpa.mil/iao/communicator
  10. Dowding, John and James Hieronymus. 2003. A Spoken Dialogue Interface to a Geologist’s Field Assistant. Proceedings of HLT/NAACL 2003. Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar
  11. Ferguson, George and James Allen. 1998. “TRIPS: An Intelligent Integrated Problem-Solving Assistant,” in Proc. of the Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-98), Madison, WI. 567-573.Google Scholar
  12. Gorin, A.L., G. Riccardi and J. Wright. 1997. How May I Help You? Speech Communication, 23 (1/2): 113-127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grinstein, G.G., H. Levkowitz, R.M. Pickett, and S. Smith. 1993. “Visualization alternatives: non-pixel based images,” Proc. Of IS&T 46 th Annual Conf., pp. 132-133.Google Scholar
  14. Harabagiu, Sanda, M., George A. Miller, Dan I. Moldovan. 1999. WordNet 2 - A Morphologically and Semantically Enhanced Resource, SIGLEX 1999.Google Scholar
  15. Harabagiu, S., M. Pasca and S. Maiorano. 2000. Experiments with Open-Domain Textual Question Answering. In Proc. of COLING-2000. 292-298.Google Scholar
  16. Hardy, H., N. Shimizu, T. Strzalkowski, L. Ting, B. Wise and X. Zhang. 2002. Cross-Document Summarization by Concept Classification. Proceedings of SIGIR-2002, Tampere, Finland.Google Scholar
  17. Hardy, H., K. Baker, L. Devillers, L. Lamel, S. Rosset, T. Strzalkowski, C. Ursu and N. Webb. 2002. Multi-layer Dialogue Annotation for Automated Multilingual Customer Service. ISLE Workshop, Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
  18. Hochberg, Judith, Nanda Kambhatla and Salim Roukos. 2002. A Flexible Framework for Developing Mixed-Initiative Dialog Systems. Proc. of 3 rd SIGDIAL Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  19. Hovy, E., L. Gerber, U. Hermjakob, M. Junk, C-Y. Lin. 2000. Question Answering in Webclopedia. Proceedings of Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-9).Google Scholar
  20. Humphreys, R. Gaizauskas, S. Azzam, C. Huyck, B. Mitchell, H. Cunningham, Y. Wilks. 1998. Description of the LaSIE-II System as Used for MUC-7. In Proceedings of the Seventh Message Understanding Conference (MUC-7.) Google Scholar
  21. Johnston, M., Ehlen, P., Bangalore, S., Walker., M., Stent, A., Maloor, P., and Whittaker, S. 2002. MATCH: An Architecture for Multimodal Dialogue Systems. In Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  22. Kobsa, A., and Wahlster, W. (eds.), 1989. User Models in Dialog Systems. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Litman, Diane J. and Shimei Pan. 2002. Designing and Evaluating an Adaptive Spoken Dialogue System. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction. 12(2/3): 111-137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lehnert, W.G. 1978. The Process of Question Answering. Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  25. Miller, G.A. 1995. WordNet: A Lexical Database. Comm. of the ACM, 38(11): 39-41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Morse, E. 2004. An Investigation of Evaluation Metrics for Analytic Question Answering. Proceedings of AQUAINT Phase 2 6-month PI Meeting, Tampa.Google Scholar
  27. Prager, John, Dragomir R. Radev, and Krzysztof Czuba. 2001. Answering what-is questions by virtual annotation. In Human Language Technology Conference, Demonstrations Section, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  28. Robertson, Stephen E., Steve Walker, Micheline Hancock-Beaulieu. 2000. Experimentation as a way of life: Okapi at TREC. Information Processing and Management 36(1): 95-108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Seneff, S. and J. Polifroni. 2000. Dialogue Management in the MERCURY Flight Reservation System. Proc. ANLP-NAACL 2000, Satellite Workshop, 1-6, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  30. Small, Sharon, Nobuyuki Shimizu, Tomek Strzalkowski and Liu Ting. 2003. HITIQA: A Data Driven Approach to Interactive Question Answering: A Preliminary Report. Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on New Directions in Question Answering, Stanford University. pp. 94-104.Google Scholar
  31. Strzalkowski, T. and J. Wang.1996. The Self-Learning Universal Concept Spotter. Proceedings of COLING-96.Google Scholar
  32. Tang, Rong, K.B. Ng, Tomek Strzalkowski and Paul Kantor. 2003. “Automatic Prediction of Information Quality in News Documents.” Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2003, Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar
  33. Traum, David. 1994. A Computational Theory of Grounding in Natural Language Conversation, TR 545 and Ph.D. Thesis, Computer Science Dept., U. Rochester.Google Scholar
  34. Wacholder, N., P. Kantor, S. Small, T. Strzalkowski, D. Kelly, R. Rittman, S. Ryan and R. Salkin. 2003. Evaluation of the HITIQA Analysts’ Workshops. Report prepared for Advanced Research and Development Activity (ARDA).Google Scholar
  35. Wacholder, et al. (forthcoming) A Model for Realistic Evaluation of an End-to-end Question Answering System. Accepted for publication in JASISTGoogle Scholar
  36. Walker, Marilyn A. 2000. An Application of Reinforcement Learning to Dialogue Strategy Selection in a Spoken Dialogue System for Email. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 12: 387-416.Google Scholar
  37. Ward, W. and B. Pellom. 1999. The CU Communicator System. http://communicator.colorado.edu/ Weizenbaum, Joseph. 1966. ELIZA - A Computer Program For the Study of Natural Language Communication Between Man and Machine. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 9 (1) pp. 6-35.
  38. Xu, Jinxi, Ana Licuanan, Jonathan May, Scott Miller and Ralph Weischedel. 2002. TREC2002 QA at BBN: Answer Selection and Confidence Estimation. Proceedings of TREC 2002. NIST Special Publication.Google Scholar
  39. Yangarber, Roman. 2002. Acquisition of Domain Knowledge. In M. T. Pazienza (ed.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  40. Yangarber, Roman. 2003. Counter-Training in Discovery of Semantic Patterns. Proceedings of ACL-2003, Sapporo, Japan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tomek Strzalkowski
    • 1
  • Sharon Small
    • 1
  • Hilda Hardy
    • 1
  • Paul Kantor
    • 2
  • Wu Min
    • 1
  • Sean Ryan
    • 1
  • Nobuyuki Shimizu
    • 1
  • Liu Ting
    • 1
  • Nina Wacholder
    • 2
  • Boris Yamrom
    • 1
  1. 1.State University of New York at AlbanyAlbanyUSA
  2. 2.Rutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations