File size: 64,757 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 | {
"paper_id": "P96-1037",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T09:03:11.800438Z"
},
"title": "Mechanisms for Mixed-Initiative Human-Computer Collaborative Discourse",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Curry",
"middle": [
"I"
],
"last": "Guinn",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "Duke University",
"location": {
"postBox": "Box 90129",
"postCode": "27708",
"settlement": "Durham",
"region": "NC"
}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "In this paper, we examine mechanisms for automatic dialogue initiative setting. We show how to incorporate initiative changing in a task-oriented human-computer dialogue system, and we evaluate the effects of initiative both analytically and via computer-computer dialogue simulation.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P96-1037",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "In this paper, we examine mechanisms for automatic dialogue initiative setting. We show how to incorporate initiative changing in a task-oriented human-computer dialogue system, and we evaluate the effects of initiative both analytically and via computer-computer dialogue simulation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "Task-Oriented Dialogues Efficient human-computer dialogue requires immediate utterance-by-utterance accommodation to the needs of the interaction. The participants must continuously focus all concerns on the goals of the task and avoid extraneous paths. This means that the dialogue initiative should always pass immediately to the participant who is best able to handle the current task. An agent is said to have dialogue initiative over a mutual goal when that agent controls how that goal will be solved by the collaborators. In the implemented voice dialogue system \"The Circuit Fix-it Shop\" (Smith et al., 1992; Smith and Hipp, 1995) , the dialogue fragment given in Figure 1 occurs between a human user and a computer collaborator. Utterances 2 and 4 indicate that the computer is directing the search for the missing wire in the faulty circuit. However, in Utterance 5 the user takes the initiative and suggests a different wire than has been proposed by the computer. In this paper we will present a theory explaining how initiative changes between participants and how computational agents can evaluate who should be in control of solving a goal.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 596,
"end": 616,
"text": "(Smith et al., 1992;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
},
{
"start": 617,
"end": 638,
"text": "Smith and Hipp, 1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 672,
"end": 680,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Motivation: Initiative in",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "1 U The LED is displaying an alternately flashing one and the top corner of a seven. 2 C There is supposed to be a wire between connector nine nine and connector one zero zero. 3 U It is there. 4 C There is supposed to be a wire between connector nine eight and connector one zero two. 5 U There is no wire on connector one zero four.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Motivation: Initiative in",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "[emphasis mine] 6 C There is supposed to be a wire between connector one zero four and connector one zero two. is in control and the other agent is passive (the master-slave assumption). For instance, in the LAD-DER system (Hendrix et al., 1978) the user has the initiative while the computer is passive. In contrast, the VODIS system (Young and Proctor, 1989) has the computer taking the initiative while the user is passive. Some dialogue systems (like GUS (Bobrow et al., 1977) ) allow for a more mixed-initiative interaction; however, the places where the user can take the initiative are limited and defined a priori. The dialogue model of Smith (1995) allows for either the computer or the user to assume degrees of initiative; however, Smith presents no algorithm for the computer to change initiative during a dialogue. Our model of mixed-initiative dialogue allows either participant to be in control of the dialogue at any point in time.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 223,
"end": 245,
"text": "(Hendrix et al., 1978)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
},
{
"start": 335,
"end": 360,
"text": "(Young and Proctor, 1989)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
},
{
"start": 459,
"end": 480,
"text": "(Bobrow et al., 1977)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 645,
"end": 657,
"text": "Smith (1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Motivation: Initiative in",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Like Smith (1995) we believe that the level of ini-Many implemented dialogue systems are question-tiative in the dialogue should mirror the level of inianswer systems with fixed initiative where one agent tiative in the task (which is a corollary to Grosz's (1978) the structure of a dialog mirrors the structure o] the underlying task). Unlike previous research in dialogue initiative, however, we attach an initiative level to each goal in the task tree. Thus an agent may have initiative over one goal but not another. As goals get pushed and popped from the problemsolving stack, initiative changes accordingly. Thus many initiative changes are done implicitly based on which goal is being solved.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 5,
"end": 17,
"text": "Smith (1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 250,
"end": 264,
"text": "Grosz's (1978)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Motivation: Initiative in",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In our model of dialogue, initiative levels for each goal are defined during the interaction based on 1) explicit and implicit initiative-changing utterances and 2) competency evaluation. Explicit and Implicit Initiative-Changing Utterances Several researchers (Whittaker and Stenton, 1988; Walker and Whittaker, 1990) have noted that dialogue control can be exchanged through overt cues in the discourse. Our model concentrates on two specific dialogue cues: questions and answers. When an agent AI asks another agent A2 to satisfy a goal G, agent A2 gains initiative over goal G and all subgoals of G until agent A2 passes control of one of those subgoals back to agent A1. A similar initiative-setting mechanism is fired if agent A1 announces that it cannot satisfy goal G. When a goal has been answered (satisfied) the problem-solving stack is popped. The initiative will now belong to whomever the initiative is for the goal on top of the stackJ. In the following human-computer dialogue gathered by Smith and Hipp(Smith and Hipp, 1995) , U: How do I fix this circuit? C: What is the LED displaying? U: Nothing. C: What is the switch at? U: Where is the switch? C: In the lower left corner. U: The switch is down. C: Put the switch up. all initiative changes can be accounted for by explicit initiative-changing utterances or by popping of the problem-solving stack due to goal resolution as illustrated in Figure 1 .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 261,
"end": 290,
"text": "(Whittaker and Stenton, 1988;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
},
{
"start": 291,
"end": 318,
"text": "Walker and Whittaker, 1990)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
},
{
"start": 1005,
"end": 1041,
"text": "Smith and Hipp(Smith and Hipp, 1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 1412,
"end": 1420,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Setting of Initiative Levels",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "Competency Evaluation for Initiative Setting How does an agent decide whether to ask its collaborator for help? An obvious approach is to ask for help when the agent is unable to satisfy a goal on its own. This approach is the basic mechanism for several dialogue systems iSince each participant is carrying out initiative evaluation independently, there may be conflicts on who should be in control. Numerous researchers have studied how negotiation may be used to resolve these conflicts (Guinn, 1994; Guinn, 1993a; Lambert and Carberry, 1992; McRoy, 1993; Sidner, 1993) and Hipp, 1995; Guinn, 1994 ). An additional approach is to ask the collaborator for help if it is believed that the collaborator has a better chance of solving the goal (or solving it more efficiently). Such an evaluation requires knowledge of the collaborating agent's capabilities as well as an understanding of the agent's own capabilities.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 490,
"end": 503,
"text": "(Guinn, 1994;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 504,
"end": 517,
"text": "Guinn, 1993a;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 518,
"end": 545,
"text": "Lambert and Carberry, 1992;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 546,
"end": 558,
"text": "McRoy, 1993;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 559,
"end": 572,
"text": "Sidner, 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 577,
"end": 588,
"text": "Hipp, 1995;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 589,
"end": 600,
"text": "Guinn, 1994",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Setting of Initiative Levels",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "Our methodology for evaluating competency involves a probabilistic examination of the search space of the problem domain. In the process of solving a goal, there may be many branches that can be taken in an attempt to prove a goal. Rather than selecting a branch at random, intelligent behavior involves evaluating (by some criteria) each possible branch that may lead toward the solution of a goal to determine which branch is more likely to lead to a solution. In this evaluation, certain important factors are examined to weight various branches. For example, during a medical exam, a patient may complain of dizziness, nausea, fever, headache, and itchy feet. The doctor may know of thousands of possible diseases, conditions, allergies, etc. To narrow the search, the doctor will try to find a pathology that accounts for these symptoms. There may be some diseases that account for all 5 symptoms, others that might account for 4 out of the 5 symptoms, and so on. In this manner, the practitioner sorts and prunes his list of possible pathologies. Competency evaluation will be based on how likely an agent's branch will be successful (based on a weighted factor analysis) and how likely the collaborator's branch will be successful (based on a weighted factor analysis and a probabilistic model of the collaborator's knowledge).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Setting of Initiative Levels",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "In Section 3 we will sketch out how this calculation is made, present several mode selection schemes based on this factor analysis, and show the results of analytical evaluation of these schemes. In Section 4 we will present the methodology and results of using these schemes in a simulated dialogue environment.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Setting of Initiative Levels",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "Our model of best-first search assumes that for each goal there exists a set of n factors, fl,.-., f~, which are used to guide the search through the problemsolving space. Associated with each factor are two weights, wi, which is the percentage of times a successful branch will have that factor and xi which is the percentage of all branches that satisfy fi. If an agent, a, knows q~',..., qn a percentage of the knowledge concerning factors fl,..., f~, respectively, and assuming independence of factors, using Bayes' rule an agent can calculate the success likelihood of each ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mathematical Analysis of Efficiency",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "p(b) = 1 -fI 1 -F(i)wi (1/k) (1) i=-I Xi",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mathematical Analysis of Efficiency",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "where b is a branch out of a list of k branches and F(i) = 1 if the agent knows branch b satisfies factor f/and F(i",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mathematical Analysis of Efficiency",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": ") = xi(1-qa) otherwise. [Note: xi(1-qa)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mathematical Analysis of Efficiency",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "is the probability that the branch satisfies factor fi but the agent does not know this fact.] We define the sorted list of branches for a goal G that an agent knows, [b~,... , b~] , where for each be~, p(b~) is the likelihood that branch b~ will result in success where p(b~) >= p(b~), Vi < j.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 167,
"end": 180,
"text": "[b~,... , b~]",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mathematical Analysis of Efficiency",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "For efficient initiative-setting, it is also necessary to establish the likelihood of success for one's collaborator's lSt-ranked branch, 2nd-ranked branch, and so on. This calculation is difficult because the agent does not have direct access to its collaborator's knowledge. Again, we will rely on a probabilistic analysis. Assume that the agent does not know exactly what is in the collaborator's knowledge but does know the degree to which the collaborator knows about the factors related to a goal. Thus, in the medical domain, the agent may know that the collaborator knows more about diseases that account for dizziness and nausea, less about diseases that cause fever and headache, and nothing about diseases that cause itchy feet. For computational purposes these degrees of knowledge for each factor can be quantified: the agent, a, may know percentage q~ of the knowledge about diseases that cause dizziness while the collaborator, c, knows percentage qC of the knowledge about these diseases. Suppose the agent has 1) a user model that states that the collaborator knows percentages q{, q~,..., q~, about factors fl,f2,...,fm respectively and 2) a model of the domain which states the approximate number of branches, N'. Assuming independence, the expected number of branches which satisfy all n factors is ExpAUN = N\" l-Ii=l Xi\" Given that a branch satisfies all n factors, the likelihood that the collaborator will know that branch is rZin_l qC. Therefore, the expected number of branches for which the collaborator knows all n factors is ExpAllN I~i~=1 qg. The probability that one of these branches is a successproducing branch is 1-[L~I 1-wi ~ (from Equation 1). By computing similar probabilities for each combination of factors, the agent can compute the likelihood that the collaborator's first branch will be a successful branch, and so on. A more detailed he-count of this evaluation is given by Guinn (1993b; 1994) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 1918,
"end": 1931,
"text": "Guinn (1993b;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 1932,
"end": 1937,
"text": "1994)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Efficiency Analysis of Dialogue Initiative",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "We have investigated four initiative-setting schemes using this analysis.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Efficiency Analysis of Dialogue Initiative",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "These schemes do not necessarily correspond to any observable human-human or human-computer dialogue behavior. Rather, they provide a means for exploring proposed dialogue initiative schemes.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Efficiency Analysis of Dialogue Initiative",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "In Random mode, one agent is given initiative at random in the event of a conflict. This scheme provides a baseline for initiative setting algorithms.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Random",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Hopefully, a proposed algorithm will do better than Random.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Random",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "SingleSelection In SingleSelection mode, the more knowledgeable agent (defined by which agent has the greater total percentage of knowledge) is given initiative. The initiative is set throughout the dialogue. Once a leader is chosen, the participants act in a master-slave fashion.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Random",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In Continuous mode, the more knowledgeable agent (defined by which agent's firstranked branch is more likely to succeed) is initially given initiative. If that branch fails, this agent's second-ranked branch is compared to the other agent's first-ranked branch with the winner gaining initiative. In general if Agent 1 is working on its ith-ranked branch and Agent 2 is working on its jth-ranked branch, we compare A1 A1",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Continuous",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Oracle In Oracle mode, an all-knowing mediator selects the agent that has the correct branch ranked highest in its list of branches. This scheme is an upper bound on the effectiveness of initiative setting schemes. No initiative setting algorithm can do better.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "p (hi) to",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "As knowledge is varied between participants we see some significant differences between the various strategies. Figure 2 summarizes this analysis. The x and y axis represent the amount of knowledge that each agent is given 2, and the z axis represents the percentage of branches explored from a single goal. SingleSelection and Continuous modes perform significantly better than Random mode. On average Continuous mode results in 40% less branches searched per goal than Random. Continuous mode 2This distribution is normalized to insure that all the knowledge is distributed between each agent. Agent 1 will have ql + (1 ql)(1-2 -q ) ql+q2 percent of the knowledge while Agent 2 will have q2 + (1 -ql)(1 -q2) q~ ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 112,
"end": 120,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF5"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "p (hi) to",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The dialogue model outlined in this paper has been implemented, and computer-computer dialogues have been carried out to evaluate the model and judge the effectiveness of various dialogue initiative schemes. In a methodology similar to that used by Power (1979) , Carletta (1992) and Walker (1993) , knowledge is distributed by a random process between agents, and the resulting interaction between these collaborating agents is observed. This methodology allows investigators to test different aspects of a dialogue theory. Details of this experimental strategy are given by Guinn (1995) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 249,
"end": 261,
"text": "Power (1979)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
},
{
"start": 264,
"end": 279,
"text": "Carletta (1992)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 284,
"end": 297,
"text": "Walker (1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF18"
},
{
"start": 576,
"end": 588,
"text": "Guinn (1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Computer Simulations",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "The use of computer-computer simulations to study and build human-computer dialogue systems is controversial.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Usage of Computer-Computer Dialogues",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Since we are building computational models of dialogue, it is perfectly reasonable to explore these computational models through computer-computer simulations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Usage of Computer-Computer Dialogues",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "The difficulty lies in what these simulations say about humancomputer or computer-computer dialogues. This author argues that computer-computer simulations are one layer in the multi-layer process of build-ing human-computer dialogue systems. Computercomputer simulations allow us to evaluate our computational models and explore issues that can not be resolved analytically. These simulations can help us prune out some mechanisms and suggest mechanisms that may work well in a human-computer system. For instance, if the dialogues that result in a computer-computer conversation are incoherent to a human observer, this suggests that the dialogue mechanisms employed may be inappropriate for a human-computer system. On the other hand, if the resulting dialogues are coherent and exhibit features that are desired in a human-computer system, this suggests that these mechanisms may work well in a human-computer system. The final test, of course, must be in the implementation of a human-computer dialogue system. The scarcity of such systems suggests that it is an extremely expensive process to build a functional human-computer dialogue system, and computer-computer simulations can assist in reducing these costs.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Usage of Computer-Computer Dialogues",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "A murder mystery domain was created with 22 suspects. An annotated example dialogue from a computer-computer collaboration in this domain is presented in Figure 3 . Agents were given partial information through a random process. By using either Random mode or Continuous mode, we can evaluate the effect of those mechanisms in this experimental environment. fWatson now has enough information to prove that Suspect7 is the murderer. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 154,
"end": 162,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF6"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Simulation Results",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "Currently, two spoken-dialogue human-computer systems are being developed using the underlying algorithms described in this paper. The Duke Programming Tutor instructs introductory computer science students how to write simple Pascal programs by providing multiple modes of input and output (voice/text/graphics) (Bierman et al., 1996) . The Advanced Maintenance Assistant and Trainer (AMAT) currently being developed by Research Triangle Institute for the U.S. Army allows a maintenance trainee to converse with a computer assistant in the diagnosis and repair of a virtual MIA1 tank.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 313,
"end": 335,
"text": "(Bierman et al., 1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Extension to Human-Computer Dialogues",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "While still in prototype development, preliminary results suggest that the algorithms that were successful for efficient computer-computer collaboration are capable of participating in coherent humanmachine interaction. Extensive testing remains to be done to determine the actual gains in efficiency due to various mechanisms. One tenet of our theory is that proper initiative setting requires an effective user model. There are several mechanisms we are exploring in acquiring the kind of user model information necessary for the previously described dialogue mode algorithms. Stereotypes (Rich, 1979; Chin, 1989 ) are a valuable tool in domains where user classification is possible and relevant. For instance, in the domain of military equipment maintenance, users can be easily classified by rank, years of experience, equipment familiarity and so on. An additional source of user model information can be dynamically obtained in environments where the user interacts for an extended period of time. A tutoring/training system has the advantage of knowing exactly what lessons a student has taken and how well the student did on individual lessons and questions. Dynamically modifying the user model based on on-going problem solving is difficult. One mechanism that may prove particularly effective is negotiating problem-solving strategies (Guinn, 1994) . The quality of a collaborator's negotiation reflects the quality of its underlying knowledge. There is a tradeoff in that negotiation is expensive, both in terms of time and computational complexity. Thus, a synthesis of user modeling techniques will probably be required for effective and efficient collaboration. 6",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 591,
"end": 603,
"text": "(Rich, 1979;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 604,
"end": 614,
"text": "Chin, 1989",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 1347,
"end": 1360,
"text": "(Guinn, 1994)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Extension to Human-Computer Dialogues",
"sec_num": "5"
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "Work on this project has been supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF-IRI-92-21842 ), the Office of Naval Research (N00014-94-1-0938), and ACT II funding from STRICOM for the Combat Service Support Battlelab.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgements",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Goal-Oriented multimedia dialogue with variable initiative",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bierman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guinn",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fulkerson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Keim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Z",
"middle": [],
"last": "Liang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Melamed",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Rajagopalan",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "A. Bierman, C. Guinn, M. Fulkerson, G. Keim, Z. Liang, D Melamed, and K Rajagopalan. 1996. Goal-Oriented multimedia dialogue with variable initiative. In submitted for publication.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "GUS, a frame driven dialog system",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Bobrow",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Kaplan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kay",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Norman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Thompson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [],
"last": "Winograd",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1977,
"venue": "Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "8",
"issue": "",
"pages": "155--173",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "D.G. Bobrow, R.M. Kaplan, M. Kay, D.A. Norman, H. Thompson, and T. Winograd. 1977. GUS, a frame driven dialog system. Artificial Intelligence, 8:155-173.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Planning to fail, not failing to plan: Risk-taking and recovery in task-oriented dialogue",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Carletta",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1992,
"venue": "Proceedings of the l~th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-92)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "896--900",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "J. Carletta. 1992. Planning to fail, not failing to plan: Risk-taking and recovery in task-oriented dialogue. In Proceedings of the l~th Interna- tional Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-92), pages 896-900, Nantes, France.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "KNOME: Modeling what the user knows in UC",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"N"
],
"last": "Chin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1989,
"venue": "User Models in Dialog Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "74--107",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "D.N. Chin. 1989. KNOME: Modeling what the user knows in UC. In A. Kobsa and W. Wahlster, ed- itors, User Models in Dialog Systems, pages 74- 107. Springer-Verlag, New York.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Discourse analysis",
"authors": [
{
"first": "B",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Grosz",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1978,
"venue": "Understanding Spoken Language, chapter IX",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "235--268",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "B. J. Grosz. 1978. Discourse analysis. In D. Walker, editor, Understanding Spoken Language, chap- ter IX, pages 235-268. Elsevier, North-Holland, New York, NY.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Conflict resolution in collaborative discourse. In Computational Models of Conflict Management in Cooperative Problem Solving",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"I"
],
"last": "Guinn",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "Workshop Proceedings from the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "C.I. Guinn. 1993a. Conflict resolution in collabora- tive discourse. In Computational Models of Con- flict Management in Cooperative Problem Solving, Workshop Proceedings from the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Cham- bery, France, August.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "A computational model of dialogue initiative in collaborative discourse. Human-Computer Collaboration: Reconciling Theory, Synthesizing Practice",
"authors": [
{
"first": "I",
"middle": [],
"last": "Curry",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guinn",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "Fall Symposium Series",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Curry I. Guinn. 1993b. A computational model of dialogue initiative in collaborative dis- course. Human-Computer Collaboration: Recon- ciling Theory, Synthesizing Practice, Papers from the 1993 Fall Symposium Series, Technical Report FS-93-05.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Meta-Dialogue Behaviors: Improving the EJficiency of Human-Machine Dialogue --A Computational Model of Variable Initiative and Negotiation in Collaborative Problem-Solving",
"authors": [
{
"first": "I",
"middle": [],
"last": "Curry",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guinn",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1994,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Curry I. Guinn. 1994. Meta-Dialogue Behaviors: Improving the EJficiency of Human-Machine Di- alogue --A Computational Model of Variable Ini- tiative and Negotiation in Collaborative Problem- Solving. Ph.D. thesis, Duke University.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "The role of computercomputer dialogues in human-computer dialogue system development",
"authors": [
{
"first": "I",
"middle": [],
"last": "Curry",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guinn",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1995,
"venue": "AAAI Spring Symposium on Empirical Methods in Discourse Interpretation and Generation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Curry I. Guinn. 1995. The role of computer- computer dialogues in human-computer dialogue system development. AAAI Spring Symposium on Empirical Methods in Discourse Interpretation and Generation, Technical Report SS-95-06.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Developing a natural language interface to complex data",
"authors": [
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Hendrix",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Sacerdoti",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sagalowicz",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Slocum",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1978,
"venue": "ACM Transactions on Database Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "105--147",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "G.G. Hendrix, E.D. Sacerdoti, D. Sagalowicz, and J. Slocum. 1978. Developing a natural language interface to complex data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, pages 105-147, June.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Modeling negotiation subdialogues",
"authors": [
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lambert",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Carberry",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1992,
"venue": "Proceedings o] the 30th Annual Meeting o] the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "193--200",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "L. Lambert and S. Carberry. 1992. Modeling ne- gotiation subdialogues. Proceedings o] the 30th Annual Meeting o] the Association for Computa- tional Linguistics, pages 193-200.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Misunderstanding and the negotiation of meaning. Human-Computer Collaboration: Reconciling Theory, Synthesizing Practice",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mcroy",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "Fall Symposium Series",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "S. McRoy. 1993. Misunderstanding and the ne- gotiation of meaning. Human-Computer Collab- oration: Reconciling Theory, Synthesizing Prac- tice, Papers from the 1993 Fall Symposium Series, AAAI Technical Report FS-93-05, September.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "The organization of purposeful dialogues. Linguistics",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Power",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1979,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "R. Power. 1979. The organization of purposeful dialogues. Linguistics, 17.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "User modeling via stereotypes",
"authors": [
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Rich",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1979,
"venue": "Cognitive Science",
"volume": "3",
"issue": "",
"pages": "329--354",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "E. Rich. 1979. User modeling via stereotypes. Cog- nitive Science, 3:329-354.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "The role of negotiation in collaborative activity. Human-Computer Collaboration: Reconciling Theory, Synthesizing Practice",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Sidner",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "Fall Symposium Series",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "C. L. Sidner. 1993. The role of negotiation in collaborative activity. Human-Computer Collab- oration: Reconciling Theory, Synthesizing Prac- tice, Papers from the 1993 Fall Symposium Series, AAAI Technical Report FS-93-05, September.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Spoken Natural Language Dialog Systems: A Practical Approach",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Smith",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Hipp",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1995,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "R.W. Smith and D.R. Hipp. 1995. Spoken Natural Language Dialog Systems: A Practical Approach. Oxford University Press, New York.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "A dialog control algorithm and its performance",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Smith",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Hipp",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Biermann",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1992,
"venue": "Proceedings o] the 3rd Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "R.W. Smith, D.R. Hipp, and A.W Biermann. 1992. A dialog control algorithm and its performance. In Proceedings o] the 3rd Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Mixed initiative in dialogue: An investigation into discourse segmentation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Walker",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Whittaker",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1990,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "70--78",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "M. Walker and S Whittaker. 1990. Mixed ini- tiative in dialogue: An investigation into dis- course segmentation. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computa- tional Linguistics, pages 70-78.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "Informational Redundancy and Resource Bounds in Dialogue",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Walker",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "M. A. Walker. 1993. Informational Redundancy and Resource Bounds in Dialogue. Ph.D. thesis, Uni- versity of Pennsylvania.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "Cues and control in expert-client dialogues",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Whittaker",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Stenton",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1988,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association/or Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "123--130",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "S. Whittaker and P. Stenton. 1988. Cues and con- trol in expert-client dialogues. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association/or Computational Linguistics, pages 123-130.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "The design and implementation of dialogue control in voice operated database inquiry systems",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Young",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"E"
],
"last": "Proctor",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1989,
"venue": "Computer Speech and Language",
"volume": "3",
"issue": "",
"pages": "329--353",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "S.J. Young and C.E. Proctor. 1989. The design and implementation of dialogue control in voice oper- ated database inquiry systems. Computer Speech and Language, 3:329-353.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "High level knowledge sources in usable speech recognition systems",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Young",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Hauptmann",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Ward",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [
"T"
],
"last": "Smith",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Werner",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1989,
"venue": "Communications o] the ACM",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "183--194",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "S.R. Young, A.G. Hauptmann, W.H. Ward, E.T. Smith, and P. Werner. 1989. High level knowl- edge sources in usable speech recognition systems. Communications o] the ACM, pages 183-194, Au- gust.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"text": ""
},
"FIGREF2": {
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Tracking Initiative via Explicit Initiative-Changing Utterances and Problem-Solving Stack Manipulation possible branch of a goal G that it knows:"
},
"FIGREF3": {
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "ql \"~-q2 percent of the knowledge. If ql + q2 = O, then set ql -= q2 -= 0.5."
},
"FIGREF5": {
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "An Analytical Comparison of Dialogue Initiative-Setting Schemes performs between 15-20% better than SingleSelection. The large gap between Oracle and Continuous is due to the fact that Continuous initiative selection is only using limited probabilistic information about the knowledge of each agent."
},
"FIGREF6": {
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "A Sample Dialoguehad to communicate to solve the task."
},
"TABREF0": {
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "A Dialogue Fragment in the Circuit Fix-it Shoppe Domain"
},
"TABREF2": {
"content": "<table><tr><td>presents results</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "Is it the case that Suspectl0 had access to the poison? Suspectl0 had access to the poison. Is it the case that Suspectl0 had an opportunity to administer the poison? I am unable to determine whether Suspectl0 had an opportunity to administer the poison. I am unable to determine whether Suspectl0 is the murderer of Lord Dunsmore. I am unable to determine whether Suspectl0 is the murderer of Lord Dunsmore. Is it the case that Suspect9 is the murderer of Lord Dunsmore? Is it the case that Suspect7 is the murderer of Lord Dunsmore? c I have proven that Suspect9 has a motive to murder Lord Dunsmore and Suspect9 had access to the poison, d I have proven that Suspect7 had access to the poison, Suspect7 had an opportunity to administer the poison, and Suspect7 has a criminal disposition. ~ Suspect7 is the murderer of Lord Dunsmore. f awatson gives control of the investigation over to Holmes. should be in control.bHolmes is giving up control of directing the investigation here. CHolmes is challenging Watson's investigative choice. dwatson negotiates for his choice. eHolmes negotiates for his choice."
},
"TABREF4": {
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "Data on 5008 Non-trivial Dialogues from the Murder Mystery Domain"
}
}
}
} |