Interpretation and Generation of Dialogue with Multidimensional Context Models

  • Harry Bunt
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6456)


This paper presents a context-based approach to the analysis and computational modeling of communicative behaviour in dialogue. This approach, known as Dynamic Interpretation Theory (DIT), claims that dialogue behaviour is multifunctional, i.e. functional segments of speech and nonverbal behaviour have more than one communicative function. A 10-dimensional taxonomy of communicative functions has been developed, which has been applied successfully by human annotators and by computer programs in the analysis of spoken and multimodal dialogue; which can be used for the functional markup of ECA behaviour; and which forms the basis of an ISO standard for dialogue act annotation. An analysis of the types of information involved in each of the dimensions leads to a design of compartmented, ’multidimensional’ context models, which have been used for multimodal dialogue management and in a computational model of grounding.


Multidimensional context modeling dialogue acts dialogue semantics dialogue generation dialogue act annotation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ahn, R.: Agents, Objects and Events. A computational approach to knowledge, observation and communication. PhD. Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, J., Schubert, L., Ferguson, G., Heeman, P., Hwang, C.J., Kato, T., Light, M., Martin, N., Miller, B., Poesio, M., Traum, D.: The TRAINS Project: A case study in building a conversational planning agent. Technical Note 94-3, University of Rochester (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allen, J., Core, M.: DAMSL: Dialogue Act Markup in Several Layers (Draft 2.1). Technical Report, Discourse Resource Initiative (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allwood, J.: An activity-based approach to pragmatics. In: Bunt, H., Black, W. (eds.) Abduction, Belief and Context in Dialogue. Studies in Computational Pragmatics, pp. 47–80. Benjamins, Amsterdam (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Allwood, J., Nivre, J., Ahlsén, E.: Speech Management or the Non-written Life of Speech. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 13, 1–48 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bunt, H.: Context and Dialogue Control. Think Quarterly 3(1), 19–31 (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bunt, H.: Dynamic Interpretation and Dialogue Theory. In: Taylor, M., Bouwhuis, D., Néel, F. (eds.) The Structure of Multimodal Dialogue, vol. 2, pp. 139–166. Benjamins, Amsterdam (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bunt, H.: Context Representation for Dialogue Management. In: Bouquet, P., Serafini, L., Brézillon, P., Benerecetti, M., Castellani, F. (eds.) CONTEXT 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1688, pp. 77–90. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bunt, H.: Dialogue pragmatics and context specification. In: Bunt, H., Black, W. (eds.) Abduction, Belief and Context in Dialogue. Studies in Computational Pragmatics, pp. 81–150. Benjamins, Amsterdam (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bunt, H.: A Framework for Dialogue Act Specification. In: 4th Joint ISO-SIGSEM Workshop on the Representation of Multimodal Semantic Information, Tilburg (January 2005),
  11. 11.
    Bunt, H.: Quantification and modification represented as Feature Structures. In: 6th International Workshop on Computational Semantics (IWCS-6), pp. 54–65 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bunt, H.: Dimensions in dialogue annotation. In: LREC 2006, 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 919–924 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bunt, H.: The DIT + +  taxonomy for functional dialogue markup. In: AAMAS 2009 Workshop, Towards a Standard Markup Language for Embodied Dialogue Acts, pp. 13–24 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bunt, H.: Multifunctionality and multidimensional dialogue semantics. In: DiaHolmia, 13th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, pp. 3–14 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bunt, H.: Multifunctionality in Dialogue. Computer Speech and Language 25(2011), 222–245 (2010), Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bunt, H., Girard, Y.: Designing an open, multidimensional dialogue act taxonomy. In: Gardent, C., Gaiffe, B. (eds.) DIALOR 2005, Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, pp. 37–44 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bunt, H., Keizer, S.: Dialogue semantics links annotation for context representation. In: Joint TALK/AMI Workshop on Standards for Multimodal Dialogue Context (2005),
  18. 18.
    Bunt, H., Keizer, S., Morante, R.: An empirically-based computational model of grounding in dialogue. In: 8th Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL 2007), pp. 283–290 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bunt, H., Romary, L.: Standardization in Multimodal Content Representation: Some Methodological Issues. In: 3rd International Conference on Language resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), pp. 2219–2222 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bunt, H., Alexandersson, J., Carletta, J., Choe, J.-W., Fang, A., Hasida, K., Lee, K., Petukhova, V., Popescu-Belis, A., Romary, L., Soria, C., Traum, D.: Towards an ISO standard for dialogue act annotation. In: LREC 2010, 8th International Conference on Language Resources and evaluation (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carberry, A.: Plan Recognition in Natural Language Dialogue. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Carletta, J., Isard, A., Isard, S., Kowtko, J., Doherty-Sneddon, G.: HCRC dialogue structure coding manual. Technical Report HCRC/TR-82 (1996)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Clark, H.: Using Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Craggs, R., McGee Wood, M.: A categorical annotation scheme for emotion in the linguistic content of dialogue. In: André, E., Dybkjær, L., Minker, W., Heisterkamp, P. (eds.) ADS 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3068, pp. 89–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ekman, P.: Universals and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion. In: Cole, J. (ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln (1972)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ekman, P.: Basic Emotions. In: Dalgliesh, T., Power, M. (eds.) Handbook of Cognition and Emotion, pp. 207–283. John Wiley, Sussex (1999)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Geertzen, J.: The automatic recognition and prediction of dialogue acts. PhD Thesis, Tilburg University (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Geertzen, J., Petukhova, V., Bunt, H.: A multidimensional approach to dialogue segmentation and dialogue act classification. In: 8th Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL 2007), pp. 140–147 (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    ISO DIS 24617-2: Language resource management - Semantic Annotation Framework - part 2: dialogue acts, ISO, Geneva (August 2010),
  30. 30.
    Keizer, S., Bunt, H.: Multidimensional dialogue management. In: 7th Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL 2006), pp. 37–45 (2006)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Keizer, S., Bunt, H.: Evaluating combinations of dialogue acts for generation. In: 8th Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL 2007), pp. 158–165 (2007)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Larsson, S.: Coding Schemas for Dialog Moves. Technical report from the S-DIME project (1998),
  33. 33.
    Laskowski, K., Burger, S.: Annotation and analysis of emotionally relevant behaviour in the ISL meeting corpus. In: LREC 2006, 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (2006)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    LIRICS D4.3: Documented Set of Semantic Data Categories. EU eContent Project LIRICS Deliverable D4.3. 3 (2007a),
  35. 35.
    LIRICS D4.4: Multilingual Test Suites for Semantically Annotated Data. EU eContent Project LIRICS Deliverable D4.3 (2007b),
  36. 36.
    Litman, D., Allen, J.: A Plan Recognition Model for Subdialogues in Conversation. Cognitive Science 11(2), 163–200 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Morante, R.: Computing meaning in interaction. PhD Thesis, Tilburg University (2007)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Petukhova, V.: Multidimensional interaction of multimodal dialogue acts in meetings. MA thesis, Tilburg University (2005)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Petukhova, V., Bunt, H.: Towards a multidimensional semantics of discourse markers in spoken dialogue. In: 8th International Workshop on Computational Semantics (IWCS-8), pp. 157–168 (2009)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Petukhova, V., Bunt, H.: Dimensions of Communication: a survey. TiCC Technical Report TR 09-003, Tilburg Center for Cognition and Communication, Tilburg University (2009)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Petukhova, V., Bunt, H.: The independence of dimensions in multidimensional dialogue act annotation. In: Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL (NAACL 2009), pp. 197–200 (2009)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Petukhova, V., Bunt, H.: Introducing Communicative Function Qualifiers. In: Fang, A., Ide, N., Webster, J. (eds.) Language Resources and Global Interoperability. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Global Interoperability for Language Resources (ICGL 2010), pp. 123–131. City University of Hong Kong (2010)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Petukhova, V., Bunt, H., Malchanau, A.: Empirical and theoretical constraints on dialogue act combinations. In: 14th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (PozDial), Poznan (2010)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Poesio, M., Traum, D.: Towards an Axiomatization of Dialogue Acts. In: Twente Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, pp. 207–222 (1998)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Popescu-Belis, A.: Dialogue Acts: One or More Dimensions?. ISSCO Working Paper 62, ISSCO, Geneva (2005)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Reidsma, D., Heylen, D., Odelman, R.: Annotating emotion in meetings. In: LREC 2006, 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (2006)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Traum, D.: A Computational Theory of Grounding in Natural Language Conversation. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester (1994)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Traum, D., Larsson, S.: The Information State Approach to Dialogue Management. In: Smith, R., van Kuppevelt, J. (eds.) Current and New Directions in Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 325–353. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harry Bunt
    • 1
  1. 1.Tilburg UniversityThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations