Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:05:40.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Natural language generation in critiquing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2009

Ivan Rankin
Ivan Rankin
Affiliation:
Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden (email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A central area of application for knowledge-based systems is for giving consultative advice to the user. Such systems engage the user in a dialogue in the process of collecting enough information to be able to infer a conclusion from the knowledge base. Traditionally, then, the main initiative in the consultation process has been allocated to the system

Type
Research Article
Information
The Knowledge Engineering Review , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 1993 , pp. 329 - 347
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J, 1987. Natural Language Understanding, Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
André, E and Rist, T, 1990. “Towards a plan-based synthesis of illustrated documents” In: Proceedings of ECAI, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Appelt, D, 1985. Planning English Sentences, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J, 1962. How to do things with words, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, M. “Analysing rhetorical relations in collaborative problem solving dialogues” (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Cawsey, A, 1989. “Explanatory dialogues” Interacting with Computers 1(1) 69–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, P and Perrault, C, 1979. “Elements of a plan-based theory of speech acts” Cognitive Sci. 3 (3).Google Scholar
Cohen, P and Levesque, H, 1985. “Speech acts and rationality” Proceedings of the23rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Cohen, R, 1987. “Analyzing the structure of argumentative discourse” Computational Linguistics 13 01–06.Google Scholar
Dahl, ö and Hellman, C, 1990. “Rhetorical relations in discourse” Papers from the Second Nordic Conference on Text Comprehension in Man and Machine, Täby, Sweden.Google Scholar
Dahl, ö and Hellman, C, 1993. “A language game analysis of critiquing” In: Papers from the Third Nordic Conference on Text Comprehension in Man and Machine, Linköping, Sweden (held in 1992).Google Scholar
Dale, R, Mellish, C and Zock, M (eds.), 1990. Current Research in Natural Language Generation, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Dale, R, Hovy, E, Rösner, D and Stock, O (eds.), 1992. Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation: 6th International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Trento, Italy.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davey, A, 1978. Discourse Production, Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, G, Lemke, A, Mastaglio, T and Morch, A, 1991. “The role of critiquing in cooperative problem solving” ACM Trans. on Infor. Syst. 9 (2) 123–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimes, J, 1975. The Thread of Discourse, Mouton Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosz, B and Sidner, C, 1986. “Attention, intention, and the structure of discourse” Computational Linguistics 12 (3) 175–204.Google Scholar
Halliday, M and Hassan, R, 1976. Cohesion in English, Longman.Google Scholar
Hobbs, J, 1985. On the Coherence and Structure of Discourse, CSLI Report CSLI–85–37, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Horacek, H, 1990. “An integrated view of text planning” In: Dale, R, Mellish, C and Zock, M (eds.) Current Research in Natural Language Generation, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hovy, E, 1988. “Approaches to the planning of coherent text” In: Proceedings 4th international Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
Hovy, E, 1990. “Unresolved issues in paragraph planning” In: Dale, R, Mellish, C and Zock, M (eds.) Current Research in Natural Language Generation, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hovy, E, 1990. “Parsimonious and profligate approaches to the question of discourse structure relations” 5th International Workshop on Text Generation, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Kass, R and Finin, T, 1988. “The need for user models in generating expert system explanations” International Journal of Expert Systems 1(4) 345–375.Google Scholar
Kay, M, 1979. “Functional grammar” In: Proceedings of the 5th Annual Meeting, Berkeley Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
McDonald, D, 1980. Natural language production as a process of decision making under constraints, PhD Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
McKeown, K, 1985. Text Generation, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKeown, K and Swartout, W, 1988. “Language generation and explanation” In: Zock, M and Sabah, G (eds.) Advances in Natural Language Generation, Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
McKeown, K, Elhadad, M, Fukumoto, Y, Lim, J, Lombardi, C, Robin, J and Smadja, F, 1990. “Language generation in COMET” In: Mellish, C, Dale, R and Zock, M (eds.) Current Research in Language Generation, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Maier, E and Hovy, E, 1991. “A metafunctionally motivated taxonomy for discourse structure relations” In: Proceedings of The Third European Workshop on Language Generation pp 38–45, Judenstein, Austria.Google Scholar
Mann, W, 1984. “Discourse structures for text generation” In: Proceedings of 10th International Conference of Computational Linguistics, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
Mann, W and Thompson, S, 1987. “Rhetorical structure theory: Description and construction of text structures” In: Kempen, G (ed.) Natural Language Generation, Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Mann, W and Thompson, S, 1988. “Rhetorical structure theory: toward a functional theory of text organization” Text 8, 243–281.Google Scholar
Miller, P, 1986. Expert Critiquing Systems, Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, P and Rennels, G, 1988. “Prose generation from expert systems” Al Magazine 9 (3), 37–44.Google Scholar
Moore, J and Paris, C, 1989. “Planning text for advisory dialogues” In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
Moore, J and Pollack, M, 1992. “A problem for RST: The need for multi-level discourse analysis” Computational Linguistics 18 (4) 537–544.Google Scholar
Moore, J and Swartout, W, 1989. “A reactive approach to explanation” In: Proceedings of IJCAI pp 1504–1510, Detroit, MI.Google Scholar
Rankin, I, 1989. The Deep Generation of Text in Expert Critiquing Systems, Licentiate Thesis No. 184, Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University.Google Scholar
Rösner, D and Stede, M, 1992. “Customizing RST for the automatic production of technical manuals” In: Dale, R, Hovy, E, Rösner, D and Stock, O (eds.) Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation pp 199–214, Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J, 1969. Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, B, 1991. “Expert critics: operationalizing the judgement/decision making literature as a theory of ‘bugs’ and repair strategies” Knowledge Acquisition 3, 175–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, B, 1992a. “Survey of expert critiquing systems” Communications of the ACM 35 (4).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, B, 1992b. Critiquing Human Error, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, R and Slocum, J, 1972. “Generating English discourse from semantic networks” Commnunications of the ACM 15 (10).Google Scholar
Toulmin, S, 1958. The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Toulrnin, S, Rieke, R and Janik, A, 1979. An Introduction to Reasoning, Macmillan.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, H and Grootendorst, R, 1983. Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Wahlster, W and Kobsa, A, 1989. “User models in dialog systems” In: Kobsa, A and Wahister, W (eds.) User Models in Dialog Systems, Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, D, 1989. Informal Logic. A Handbook for Critical Argumentation pp 3–13, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weiner, J, 1980. “BLAH, a system which explains its reasoning” Artificial Intelligence 35 (15).Google Scholar
Woods, W, 1970. “Transition network grammar for natural language analysis” Communications of the ACM 13 591–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zock, M, Adorni, G and Ferrari, G (eds.), 1993. Preprints from the Fourth European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Pisa, Italy.Google Scholar