Abstract
Dialogue systems need to be able to understand a user’s communicative intentions, reason with those intentions, form their own communicative intentions, and realize those intentions with actual language to be uttered to the user. Oftentimes in dialogue systems, however, what these communicative intentions actually correspond to is never clearly defined. We propose a descriptive model of dialogue, based on collaborative problem solving, which defines communicative intentions as attempts to modify a shared collaborative problem-solving state between the user and system. Modeling dialogue at the level of collaborative problem solving allows us to model a wider array of dialogue types than previous models, including the range of collaboration paradigms (master-slave to mixedinitiative) and interaction types (planning, execution, and interleaved planning and execution). It also provides a definition for utterance-level communicative intentions for use within a dialogue system.
This material is based upon work supported by Dept. of Education (GAANN) grant no. P200A000306; ONR research grant no. N00014-01-1-1015; DARPA research grant no. F30602-98-2-0133; and a grant from the W. M. Keck Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the above-mentioned organizations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Allen, J., Blaylock, N., and Ferguson, G. (2002). A problem solving model for collaborative agents. In First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Bologna, Italy.
Allen, J., Byron, D., Dzikovska, M., Ferguson, G., Galescu, L., and Stent, A. (2000). An architecture for a generic dialogue shell. Journal of Natural Language Engineering special issue on Best Practices in Spoken Language Dialogue Systems Engineering, 6(3): 1–16.
Allen, J., Ferguson, G., and Stent, A. (2001a). An architecture for more realistic conversational systems. In Proceedings of Intelligent User Interfaces 2001 (IUI-01), pages 1–8, Santa Fe, NM.
Allen, J. F., Byron, D. K., Dzikovska, M., Ferguson, G., Galescu, L., and Stent, A. (2001b). Towards conversational human-computer interaction. AI Magazine, 22(4):27–37.
Ardissono, L., Boella, G., and Lesmo, L. (1996). Recognition of problemsolving plans in dialogue interpretation. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on User Modeling, pages 195–197, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii.
Blaylock, N. (2002). Managing communicative intentions in dialogue using a collaborative problem solving model. Technical Report 774, University of Rochester, Department of Computer Science.
Blaylock, N., Allen, J., and Ferguson, G. (2002a). Synchronization in an asynchronous agent-based architecture for dialogue systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialog, Philadelphia.
Blaylock, N., Dowding, J., and Allen, J. (2002b). A dialogue model for interaction with planners, schedulers and executives. In Proceedings of the 3rd International NASA Workshop on Planning and Scheduling for Space, Houston, Texas. To appear.
Carberry, S. (1990). Plan Recognition in Natural Language Dialogue. ACL-MIT Press Series on Natural Language Processing. MIT Press.
Carberry, S., Kazi, Z., and Larabert, L. (1992). Modeling discourse, problemsolving and domain goals incrementally in task-oriented dialogue. In Proc. 3rd Int. Workshop on User Modeling, pages 192–201. Wadern.
Chu-Caroll, J. and Brown, M. K. (1997). Initiative in collaborative interactions — its cues and effects. In Haller, S. and McRoy, S., editors, Working Notes of AAAI Spring 1997 Symposium on Computational Models of Mixed Initiative Interaction, pages 16–22, Stanford, CA.
Chu-Carroll, J. and Carberry, S. (2000). Conflict resolution in collaborative planning dialogues. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53(6): 969–1015.
Cohen, P. R. and Levesque, H. J. (1990). Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence, 42:213–261.
Cohen, P. R., Morgan, J., and Pollack, M., editors (1990). Intentions in Communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Ferguson, G., Allen, J., Blaylock, N., Byron, D., Chambers, N., Dzikovska, M., Galescu, L., Shen, X., Swier, R., and Swift, M. (2002). The Medication Advisor project: Preliminary report. Technical Report 776, University of Rochester, Department of Computer Science.
Grosz, B. and Sidner, C. (1986). Attention, intention, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12(3): 175–204.
Grosz, B. J. and Kraus, S. (1996). Collaborative plans for complex group action. Artificial Intelligence, 86(2):269–357.
Grosz, B. J. and Sidner, C. L. (1990). Plans for discourse. In Cohen et al., 1990, pages 417–444.
Lambert, L. and Carberry, S. (1991). A tripartite plan-based model of dialogue. In Proceedings of the 29th ACL, pages 47–54, Berkeley, CA.
Levesque, H., Cohen, P., and Nunes, J. (1990). On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 94–99, Boston. AAAI.
Lochbaum, K. E. (1998). A collaborative planning model of intentional structure. Computational Linguistics, 24(4):525–572.
Lochbaum, K. E., Grosz, B. J., and Sidner, C. L. (2000). Discourse structure and intention recognition. In Dale, R., Moisl, H., and Sommers, H., editors, Handbook of Natural Language Processing, pages 123–146. Marcel Dekker, New York.
Ramshaw, L. A. (1991). A three-level model for plan exploration. In Proceedings of the 29th ACL, pages 39–46, Berkeley, CA.
Rao, A. S. and Georgeff, M. P. (1991). Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In Allen, J., Fikes, R., and Sandewall, E., editors, Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pages 473–484, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Morgan Kaufmann.
Rich, C., Sidner, C. L., and Lesh, N. (2001). COLLAGEN: Applying collaborative discourse theory to human-computer interaction. AI Magazine, 22(4): 15–25. Also available as MERL Tech Report TR-2000-38.
Searle, J. R. (1990). Collective intentions and actions. In Cohen et al., 1990, pages 401–415.
Traum, D. R. (1994). A computational theory of grounding in natural language conversation. Technical Report 545, University of Rochester, Department of Computer Science. PhD Thesis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Blaylock, N., Allen, J., Ferguson, G. (2003). Managing Communicative Intentions with Collaborative Problem Solving. In: van Kuppevelt, J., Smith, R.W. (eds) Current and New Directions in Discourse and Dialogue. Text, Speech and Language Technology, vol 22. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0019-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0019-2_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-1615-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0019-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive