Conviction overhauling in talked dialog frameworks .


27 views
Uploaded on:
Description
belief updating in spoken dialog systems. Dan Bohus Computer Science Department Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213. acknowledgements Alex Rudnicky, CMU Eric Horvitz & Tim Paek, MSR Antoine Raux. spoken dialog systems. use natural language processing technology
Transcripts
Slide 1

conviction overhauling in talked exchange frameworks Dan Bohus Computer Science Department Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 affirmations Alex Rudnicky, CMU Eric Horvitz & Tim Paek, MSR Antoine Raux

Slide 2

talked discourse frameworks utilize characteristic dialect handling innovation take part in an objective situated discussion look into group data get to, summon and-control individual colleagues, taskable specialists, coaching frameworks industry less complex computerized telephone systems

Slide 3

the issue … mistaken assumptions prompt collaboration breakdowns

Slide 4

all the more solidly … S: What city would you say you are leaving from? U: Urbana Champaign [OKAY IN THAT same PAY] S: Sorry I\'m not certain I comprehended what you said. What city are you leaving from ? U: Urbana Champaign [for minute since HEY] S: despite everything i\'m experiencing difficulty understanding you. To go on, I require you to answer the accompanying inquiry. What city would you say you are leaving from? U: Chicago [CHICAGO] S: going from Chicago. Where might you want to go? U: Huntsville [SEOUL] S: heading out to Seoul. What day did you have to travel? U: no I\'m setting out to Birmingham [THE TRAVELING to berlin P_M] S: going toward the evening. Approve what day would you be withdrawing chicago U:/uh/the tenth of august [AT THE TENTH OF AUGUST] S: a flight tomorrow… I have a Korean Airlines flight leaving Chicago at 1:40pm, arrives Seoul at 5pm the following day. Would you like to take that? U: my goal is Birmingham [flight goal mr WEEKEND] S: going on Saturday, August 12 th … I have a flight withdrawing Chicago at 1:40pm arrives Seoul at …

Slide 5

understanding mistakes originate from the discourse acknowledgment prepare troublesome working conditions commonplace word-blunder rates 20-30% up to half for non-locals solid negative effect on communications

Slide 6

pathways to expanded strength nimbly handle blunders through discussion enhance acknowledgment identify the issues build up an arrangement of recuperation methodologies know how to pick between them ( approach )

Slide 7

/0.07/0.72/0.65 certainty scores/0.35/0.58/0.28 guarding against false impressions S: [… ] What city are you leaving from ? U: [for minute since HEY] S: regardless i\'m experiencing difficulty understanding you. To go on, I require you to answer the accompanying inquiry. What city would you say you are leaving from? U: [CHICAGO] S: going from Chicago. Where might you want to go? U: [SEOUL] S: venturing out to Seoul… What day did you have to travel? U: [THE TRAVELING to berlin P_M] S: going toward the evening. Affirm what day would you be leaving chicago U: [AT THE TENTH OF AUGUST] S: a flight tomorrow… I have a Korean Airlines flight withdrawing Chicago at 1:40pm, arrives Seoul at 5pm the following day. Would you like to take that? U: [flight goal mr WEEKEND]

Slide 8

guarding against misconceptions S: [… ] What city are you leaving from ? U: [for minute since HEY] S: regardless i\'m experiencing difficulty understanding you. To go on, I require you to answer the accompanying inquiry. What city would you say you are leaving from? U: [CHICAGO] S: going from Chicago. Where might you want to go? U: [SEOUL] S: making a trip to Seoul… What day did you have to travel? U: [THE TRAVELING to berlin P_M] S: going toward the evening. Affirm what day would you be withdrawing chicago U: [AT THE TENTH OF AUGUST] S: a flight tomorrow… I have a Korean Airlines flight leaving Chicago at 1:40pm, arrives Seoul at 5pm the following day. Would you like to take that? U: [flight goal mr WEEKEND]/0.07/0.72 landing = {Seoul/0.65}/0.65 certainty scores affirmation activities dismiss express affirmation Did you say Seoul? verifiable affirmation making a trip to Seoul … What day did you have to travel? acknowledge/0.35/0.58/0.28

Slide 9

flight = { … } landing = { … } takeoff = { … } entry = { … } flight = { … } f takeoff = { … } flight = { … } entry = { … } takeoff = { … } landing = { … } conviction overhauling S: [… ] What city are you leaving from ? U: [for minute since HEY] S: despite everything i\'m experiencing difficulty understanding you. To go on, I require you to answer the accompanying inquiry. What city would you say you are leaving from? U: [CHICAGO] S: going from Chicago. Where might you want to go? U: [SEOUL] S: going to Seoul… What day did you have to travel? U: [THE TRAVELING to berlin P_M] S: going toward the evening. Approve what day would you be withdrawing chicago U: [AT THE TENTH OF AUGUST] S: a flight tomorrow… I have a Korean Airlines flight leaving Chicago at 1:40pm, arrives Seoul at 5pm the following day. Would you like to take that? U: [flight goal mr WEEKEND]/0.07/0.72 entry = {Seoul/0.65}/0.65 certainty scores/0.35 landing = ? /0.58/0.28

Slide 10

entry = {Seoul/0.65} f/0.35 landing = ? conviction overhauling: issue proclamation S: setting out to Seoul… What day did you have to travel? U: [THE TRAVELING to berlin P_M] given an underlying conviction B introductory (C) over idea C a framework activity SA(C) a client reaction R build a redesigned conviction B overhauled (C) ← f ( B starting (C) , SA(C) , R )

Slide 11

plot related work proposed approach information trials and results impacts on worldwide execution conclusion and future business related work : proposed approach : information : analyses and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 12

? recognizing misconceptions and rectifications certainty comment word-level [Cox, Chase, Bansal, Ravinshankar, etc] semantic certainty explanation [Walker, San-Segundo, Bohus, etc] redress location [Litman, Swerts, Hirschberg, Krahmer, Levow] distinguish when the client amends the framework landing = {Seoul/0.65} S: making a trip to Seoul… What day did you have to travel? U: [THE TRAVELING to berlin P_M] Conf=0.35 Corr=0.47 landing = ? related work : proposed approach : information : tests and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 13

current answers for following convictions most frameworks just track single values new values overwrite old qualities utilize basic heuristic standards express affirmation S: did you say you needed to travel to Seoul? yes → trust theory no → erase speculation "other" → non-understanding verifiable affirmation S: heading out to Seoul … what day did you have to travel? depend on new values overwriting old qualities related work : proposed approach : information : trials and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 14

diagram related work proposed approach information tests and results impacts on worldwide execution conclusion and future business related work : proposed approach : information : analyses and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 15

conviction overhauling: issue proclamation S: flying out to Seoul… What day did you have to travel? U: [THE TRAVELING to berlin P_M] entry = {Seoul/0.65} f/0.35 landing = ? given an underlying conviction B introductory (C) over idea C a framework activity SA(C) a client reaction R develop a redesigned conviction B upgraded (C) ← f ( B starting (C) , SA(C) , R ) related work : proposed approach : information : tests and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 16

YUMA, AZ ALPINE, TX ALPENA, MI ALBANY, NY ABILENE, TX ALLIANCE, NE ABERDEEN, TX ALLAKAKET, AK ALLENTOWN, PA ALEXANDRIA, LA ALBUQUERQUE, NM conviction representation B overhauled (C) ← f ( B beginning (C) , SA(C), R) most exact representation likelihood conveyance over the arrangement of conceivable qualities takeoff however framework "listens" just a little number of clashing qualities for an idea all through a session max = 3 clashing qualities heard just in 7% of cases, more than 1 esteem heard related work : proposed approach : information : trials and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 17

departure_city [k=3, m=2, n=1] Austin Houston other Boston S: Did you say you were flying from Austin? U: [NO ASPEN] Boston Austin other Ø Aspen Boston Aspen other conviction representation packed conviction representation k speculations + other progressively include and drop theories recollect m speculations, include n new ones ( m + n = k ) B upgraded (C) ← f ( B introductory (C) , SA(C), R) S: flying from Aspen… what is your goal? U: [NO NO I DIDN\'T THAT THAT] B … (C) is a multinomial variable of degree k +1 related work : proposed approach : information : investigations and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 18

framework activity B overhauled (C) ← f (B beginning (C), SA(C) , R) related work : proposed approach : information : examinations and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 19

client reaction B redesigned (C) ← f (B introductory (C), SA(C), R ) related work : proposed approach : information : trials and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 20

approach multinomial relapse issue multinomial summed up direct model example productive stepwise approach highlight determination BIC to control over-fitting one separate model for every framework activity B upgraded (C) ← f SA(C) (B starting (C), R) B overhauled (C) ← f ( B starting (C), SA(C), R ) related work : proposed approach : information : analyses and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 21

diagram related work proposed approach information tests and results consequences for worldwide execution conclusion and future business related work : proposed approach : information : tests and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 22

information gathered with RoomLine a telephone based blended activity talked discourse framework meeting room reservation unequivocal and certain affirmations straightforward heuristic guidelines for conviction redesigning express affirm: yes/no understood affirm: new values overwrite old ones related work : proposed approach : information : tests and results : worldwide execution : conclusion

Slide 23

corpus client concentrate on 46 members (first-time clients) 10 situation based connections every corpus 449 sessions, 8848 client turns orthographically interpreted physically explained misunde

Recommended
View more...