Skip to main content

A Belief Revision Model of Repair Sequences in Dialogue

  • Conference paper
New Directions for Intelligent Tutoring Systems

Part of the book series: NATO ASI Series ((NATO ASI F,volume 91))

  • 60 Accesses

Abstract

In any mixed-intiative dialogue it is important to be able to recognise and deal with problems and inconsistencies as they arise. For example, one participant may interpret an utterance in a way that was not intended. The other participant may be able to recognise this from the first participant’s later utterance(s), and offer, a clarification. This type of misunderstanding and repair may occur frequently in tutorial and advisory dialogues, where, for example, one can not rely on users to be able to explicitly tell when they have misunderstood an utterance. This paper shows how a belief revision approach maybe used to model this, and related types of repair sequences in dialogue.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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. Appelt, D. and Konolige, K.: A practical non-monotonic theory for reasoning about speech acts. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, pp. 170–178, 1988.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Cawsey, A.: The structure of tutorial discourse. In: Proceedings of de Fourth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education (D. Bierman, J. Breuker, and J. Sandberg, eds.), pp. 47–53, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Clancey, W.: Knowledge-Based Tutoring: the GUIDOM system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Clark, H. and Schaefer, E.: Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, vol 13, pp. 259–295, 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen, P.: Heuristic Reasoning About Uncertainty. London: Pitman, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  6. de Kleer, J.: An assumption based truth maintenance system. Artificial Intelligence, vol 28, pp. 127–190, 1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Doyle, J.: A truth maintenance system. Artificial Intelligence, vol 12, pp. 232–272, 1979.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Fox, B.: Interactional reconstruction in real-time language processing. Cognitive Science, vol 11, pp. 365–388, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Galliers, J. R.: Belief Revision and a Theory Communication. Technical Report 193, Cambridge University Computer Laboratory, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Jones, J. and Millington, M.: Modelling unix users with an assumption-based truth maintenance system: some preliminary findings. In: Reason Maintenance Systems and Their Applications (B. Smith and G. Kellerher, eds.), pp. 134–155, Ellis Horwood, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kass, R. and Finin, T.: Rules for the implicit acquisition of knowledge about the user. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 295–300, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kellerher, G. and Smith, B.: A brief introduction to reason maintenance systems. In: Reason Maintenance Systems and Their Applications (B. Smith and G. Kellerher, eds.), pp. 134–155, Ellis Horwood, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Konolige, K. and Pollack, M.: Ascribing plans to agents. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Levinson, S. L.: Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  15. McCoy, K. F.: Correcting object-related misconceptions: how should the system respond. In: Proceedings of COLING 84, pp. 444–447, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Perrault, C. R. and Allen, J.: Plan-based analysis of indirect speech acts. Computational Linguistics, vol 6, pp. 167–183, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schegloff, E.: Pre-sequences and indirection: Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, vol 12, pp. 55–62, 1988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Schegloff, E., Jefferson, G. and Sacks, H.: The preference for self-correction in the organisation of repair in conversation. Language, vol 53, pp. 355–361, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Woolf, B. and McDonald, D.: Context-dependent transitions in discourse. Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 355–361, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Cawsey, A. (1992). A Belief Revision Model of Repair Sequences in Dialogue. In: Costa, E. (eds) New Directions for Intelligent Tutoring Systems. NATO ASI Series, vol 91. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-77681-6_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-77681-6_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-77683-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-77681-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics