Skip to main content

Allowing Multiple Question Types to Influence the Resulting Explanation Structure

  • Conference paper
Book cover AI and Cognitive Science ’90

Part of the book series: Workshops in Computing ((WORKSHOPS COMP.))

  • 115 Accesses

Abstract

This paper presents an empirical study and analysis of natural dialogues between experts, novices and partial experts. From this analysis a theory of explanation dialogues is developed known as Extended Schema based Theory (EST). In EST questions are interpreted by combining information from different, semantically related question types which together best capture the essence and meaning of the question. This theory is then applied to the design of an architecture and computational model of interpreting questions and generating explanations. The expert system, named EXPLAIN, understands the nature of the question and is able to take account of the previous dialogue. Also, the system can tailor its responses to an individual user’s characteristics, including level of expertise and depth of knowledge in the domain.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Shortliffe, E. H., Computer based medical consultation: MYCIN, New York: Elsevier, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  2. McKeown, K., Text Generation: Using Discourse Strategies and Focus Constraints to generate natural language text, Cambridge University Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Swartout, W., XPLAIN: a System for Creating and Explaining Expert Consulting Programs, Artificial Intelligence 21 p 285 - 325, 1983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sarantinos E. and Johnson, P. Generating explanations: There is more to it than meets the eye, Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology, Tokyo, Japan, October 1 - 5, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sarantinos, E. and Johnson, P., Explanation Dialogues: A theory of how experts provide explanations to novices and partial experts, Artificial Intelligence,To Appear.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gilbert, N., Question and Answer Types. D. S. Moralee (ed), Research and Development in Expert Systems IV, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p 162-172, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hughes, S., Question Classification in Rule-based Systems. Research and development in expert systems II, Cambridge University Press, 1986, 123131.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lehnert, W., The process of Question Answering: A computer Simulation of Cognition" Chapter 3. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J. 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nicolosi, E., Leaning, M. S, Boroujerdi, M. A., The Development of an Explanatory System Using Knowledge-Based Models, In Proceedings of the 4th Explanations Workshop, Manchester University, 14 - 16 Sept 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pilkinghton, R., Tattersall, C, Hartley, R., Instructional Dialogue Management. CEC ESPRIT p-280 EUROHELP, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Wexelblat, R., The Confidence of Their Help, AAAI’88 Workshop on Explanation, p 80 - 82, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Maybury, M., M.Phil Thesis: A Report Generator, Engineering Department Library, Cambridge University, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Valley, K., Explanation Generation in an Expert System Shell. Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh, 80 South Bridge, Edinburgh, EH1 1HN, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cawsey, A., Explaining the behaviour of simple electronic circuits, International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Montreal, June 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Williams, W., Composition and Rhetoric, DC. Heath and Co, Boston, 1893.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Shipherd, H. R., The fine art of writing, The MacMillan Co, New York, N.Y., 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Grimes, J E., The thread of discourse. Mouton, The Hague, Paris, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sacerdoti, E., A structure for plans and behaviour, Elsevier North-Holland, Inc., Amsterdam, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Moore, J. and Swartout, W., A reactive approach to explanation, Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Natural Language generation, Los Angeles, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mann, W. and Thompson, S., Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization, TEXT b (3) 1988 243 - 281. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ballim, A., and Wilks, Y., Stereotypical Belief and Dynamic Agent Modelling, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on User Modelling, Hawaii, USA, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cawsey, A., Explanatory Dialogues, Interacting with Computers, 1: 69 - 72, 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sarantinos E. and Johnson, P. Explanation Dialogues: A computational model of interpreting questions and generating tailored explanations, Proceedings of the 5th UK Workshop on Explanations, Manchester University, UK, April 2527, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wilkins, D., Domain independent planning: Representation and plan generation, Artificial Intelligence, 22: 269 - 301, 1984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Doyle, R., Atkinson, D., Doshi, R., Generating perception requests and expectations to verify the execution of plans, Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, p 81-88, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Broverman, C., and Croft, W., Reasoning about exceptions during plan execution monitoring, Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Seattle, Washinghton, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sidner, C., Towards a computational theory of definite anaphora comprehension in English discourse, Ph.D dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass., 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kass, R., Implicit Acquisition of User Models in Cooperative Advisory Systems, Technical Report MS-CIS-87-05, Department of Computer Science, University of Pennsylvania, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sarantinos, E. and Johnson, P. Tailoring Explanations to the User’s Level of Expertise and Domain knowledge, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Tools For Artificial Intelligence 90 (TAI 90), Washington D.C., USA, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Sarantinos, E. and Johnson, P. Consultation Dialogues, Proceedings of the AAAI-90 Workshop on Complex Systems, Ethnomethodology and Interaction Analysis, Boston, USA, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sarantinos, E. and Johnson, P. Interpreting questions and generating explanations during consultation dialogues, Proceedings of the Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence ‘90 (PRICAI 90), Nagoya, Japan, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sarantinos, E., Johnson, P. (1991). Allowing Multiple Question Types to Influence the Resulting Explanation Structure. In: McTear, M.F., Creaney, N. (eds) AI and Cognitive Science ’90. Workshops in Computing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3542-5_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3542-5_20

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-19653-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-3542-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics