'Kay. Hmm. Okay everybody. Welcome to the detailed design meeting. Um Let's see. Our agenda. Last time we discussed the squishy fruitiness of our remote controls and how we might pursue that. Um and I think looks like we've come up with some ideas. Um and we also talked about materials we'd use and what kind of chip would be necessary. Um so for later in the meeting I've done a a spreadsheet of production costs so we'll take a look at that. Um and see if it's changed at all from when we last discussed it. Um so actually I think Yeah um f you guys wanna give a prototype presentation of.

Okay well um. So our design looks something like this. This being the wheel that you use to uh change channels or volume or whatever. This is a button, serves as the power button if you hold it down, and if you just tap on it I think it brings up the menu. And uh the base of the remote control, which has a squishy spongy rubbery feel, is interchangeable. So you can change the colour, according to your to suit your living room or whatever. And it comes.

You could change the vegetable, or fruit.

yeah, I can change the vegetable.

Oh is that broccoli?.

This one's broccoli.

Yeah.

So this snaps off and you can put on whichever one you want. This is not to scale'cause it would have the battery inside it. This is a mango.

The it's trendy fruit, it's not just ordinary fruits.

You don't have orange, you have mango. Um I guess strawberry's not as trendy, but.

'S a very bright strawberry..

So we'll come up with a variety of trendy and exciting fruit designs for the remote control. And then people will be encouraged to buy three or five of them, because they'll need to switch'em out.

It's been a l

It's been a little bit difficult to um make sure that it's hand-holdable, and that the user can use it, you know, it's not too big. Uh but we think that this you know, this size will be okay and we will have to fit the battery case in there somehow.

Mm-hmm.

Oh yeah.

And I guess the only other thing that we really didn't talk about was or design yet actually, would be the um thing the locator. How how so.

Well the locator is just chip that's inside there.

Okay so that's just.

And the beeper's also inside there too somewhere

So you have to have a button on your on your you have to attach the button to the.

Yeah we didn't design that.

Yeah we have that that has yes yet to be designed.

But it would be coordinating with that of course.

Yeah that c hey that that could you know match the handset.

Yeah.

Mm-hmm.

You could have a broccoli, or you could have a mango..

So. Tada.

Oh. Um if you wanna look in your project documents folder, there's an Excel spreadsheet. Um the only one that's in there, production costs. And if you open it up. Um I've just stuck the numbers in, it was a real challenge there. But if I missed anything that we've gone over, or if you see something that has changed.

I mean, we decided on batteries, and the regular chip would be necessary for the more advanced iPod-like button. Um I said uncurved or flat. I think that's what you have there, is that right? For the for the plastic part would be.

My impression was that flat meant like like one of those square remotes.

Oh. Okay.

But it's really not very clear, because you got single curve and double curve and d I dunno what that means.

Right.

One side is curved and then the other side is curved.

Well yeah. If we're talking about the area just oh I d I dunno. I guess we'd have to contact the company that makes them and see.

Um so what else? There's plastic for that area around the button. Um and then rubber would be the squishy like thing right?

Mm-hmm.

Um and lots of special colours actually. Uh scroll wheel. Do you see anything that I've missed?

No I think that's alright.

Okay so that would make our total of eleven point nine, which is even less than twelve point five, which means we'd be making even more of a profit.

And if we sold a lot of squishy things.

Mm.

Boo yeah. Okay. S So Mm. Did y what did you work on? The.

Um evaluation criteria.

Okay. Do you wanna.

I've got a presentation.

Okay. I think that's.

So I need where's the cable? Right what happens is we have to um decide whether this this whole this whole project we've been working on actually um meets the standards we were set at the start. Um. Right. This doesn't okay. Um the method is we well I've analysed the user requirements and integrated them to the trends found in marketing reports and in our company strategy marketing. And um the findings were that we need it to look in a certain way, feel in a certain way, and this is everything's listed down. Um, look in a certain way, feel in a certain way, it has to be technologically innovative and it has to be easy to use. These are all things we looked at at the start, um and criteria that have to be met. We have to use a table, I'll show you that later, together to decide whether it meets the standards. And we we have therefore in total um We have five we have eleven points according to which this should be evaluated. And um the cri well basically the findings are the same as the evaluation criteria. I would like to show you the table we have to use. Um. No. This is the table. Can you see this here?

Mm-hmm.

Um so the que the questions I've given you c could you write that down? True is one and and false is seven. And we'll just go through each point together, hopefully. Um. I think if each of us gives an opinion then they can be mixed somehow.

I dunno how it works exactly, I haven't been told.

Yeah. Is it possible that we can bring this up on our own.

Yeah it's in the um it's in the project documents.

Is it meeting three minutes? No it's not minutes.

It's called evaluation criteria.

Okay.

And it's under evaluation.

Huh, the PowerPoint one?

Hmm?

Okay. Cool.

Yeah. You've found it all?

Yeah.

So it was um Yeah true's one.

True's one and false is seven.

Do you want us to discuss this together or do you want us to do it singly?

Um we can do it separately and then discuss it

Yeah okay.

if if that's what people wanna do.

So it's actually a scale.

Wait, one is true and.

Um,

so these are the questions we're answering. And one is.

yes it's if it's fancy you put one,

One, right okay.

if it's really unfancy it's seven.

If it's somewhere in between you put four.

Yeah, something.

Okay.

Okay. Does it feel fancy?

Feels like play-dough.

No..

They shouldn't really be questions. Should be more like Are the batteries easy to insert?.

I'm gonna say yes..

Yes? Very very true. Okay.

I imagine they're somewhere on the front. We have a little case that you slip'em in.

Okay.

Are we just about ready?

Apparently I'm supposed to use the whiteboard. Do we um is it necessary?

I don't think so. It's.

We'll just do um.

yeah the the marker thing kinda stopped working last time we.

Yeah. Okay.

Our animals will forever be there.

Yeah. Okay.

Un unless you feel you need it t to.

I don't feel any.

okay okay.

We'll.

right um Right so one point one? We'll just go in a circle.

'Kay

One.

Five.

Right. Ooh I don't know.

Right. One?

Five.

Five.

Five.

Two. Okay so do we just add it up and divide it by four? Is that what the company does?

I I think we should.

It's four if you wanna do that.

Yeah.

Yeah?

Yeah.

It adds to sixteen, so that's four.

Oh no. It adds to thirteen. One five five two.

Oh I thought she said five.

Hmm.

One five five two is thirteen, over four for now. I think that's um next?

Um three.

Six.

Six.

Really?.

Yeah..

Two.

I wasn't cheating I swear.

Uh-oh. Right. One point three is.

So it's a one was true and seven was false?

Uh.

Huh?

Okay, so you guys really didn't like it?

Yeah.

Oh I thought it was the other way round.

Wait a minute.

I really.

I thought it was the other way round too.

So we do have about the same thing, we just have it the other way.

Well uh.

Sh Yeah I I was thinking one means no points, you know, all the way up to the top.

Yeah yeah. It was one is true and false is seven.

I should've kept the table up.

Oh gosh. Okay. Well.

I'll just I'll just reverse them all. It's no problem.

Yeah.

Right, well I'm glad this came out.

Yeah..

I thought you guys hated it..

I was like, why did you guys design it that way if you hated it?.

Yeah.

Yeah..

No. Oh that's quite funny.

Okay.

Okay..

Yeah.

Okay. So, starting again, one point one?

One.

Say two.

Three.

Two. Okay, one point two?

Uh three.

Two.

Two.

Two. Okay. Um, one point three?

One.

One.

One.

Ha. Two point one?

Two.

Uh two.

Uh two.

Two point I think I missed two. Wait, is that two point one?

Yeah I put it down as one point four for some reason.

Yeah.

One point four, one point five. Okay right

Oh dear, okay. Sorry.

that's I have two of them.

Mine has all kinds of problems.

Two and one.

Sorry about that. T two point two, which is one point five.

One.

Uh three. Wait why did I put three?

Uh one.

I meant one on mine too.

Okay. Three point one. Is that correct on my slide?

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah?

Uh one.

Three point one. I have four.

Three.

One, four, three, three, three point two?

Three.

Three.

Uh. One.

Three point three.

One.

One.

Two.

Four point one?

One.

Two.

Five.

Two. Four point two.

Two.

Three.

Four.

Two and four point three.

Two.

One, two.

One.

Two.

Right so I put one on that.

Okay I'll um I'll just do the calculations now if you want to continue.

Okay. Um.

Or is it tedious? I'm I'm sorry this was so tedious for everyone.

No no that's um I think we should look at the ones that like where s where people said four, where um it looks like we might wanna discuss changing an aspect of the remote.

I didn't know how else to do it. Okay. Well the worst ones were three point one.

Mm-hmm.

Do does every ones have the slide?

The.

Three point one.

that was material.

Slide show. Material technologically innovative, okay. Um,

Mm.

do you want to change it? What are the suggestions? I don't know, anyone?.

Um.

Which one is that again sorry? Three point one?

Mm-hmm.

Yeah that it's three point one was not that good. Four point one.

Does the shape.

The shape.

I think.

Four point two?

See I'm having I'm having trouble imagining the is it uh gonna be the size, like the the controller? It or bigger?

I think the wheel would probably be mm.

Because.

What if we just smash all the vegetables down flat?

And like then it you could hold it in your hand better.

I think the base would definitely be larger,'cause some of these are not as easy to hold. They're kinda smallish.

Yeah. No but I imagine even if it was bigger, like if it's round and it's big then you you can't get that's why remote controls are long because you have that thumb kind of.

Yeah.

Yeah.

The flat one. Yeah.

so c they could all be bananas and cucumbers.

Yeah.

Um but I don't s I I personally don't think this is comfortable to to sit there, like it's an awkward position.

I didn't yeah. But like if if you just squash them flat like and you made it flat.

Well if they're that s uh stress ball stuff they would be pretty squishable. Mm.

But it's still too big I think, in your hand. Yeah.

Yeah. And would it even resemble fruit that way?

I mean.

Yeah like certain ones you'd have to limit the fruit selection,

Yeah.

like you could probably do a strawberry still.

Yeah.

I think the broccoli would be out.

You could do, although the broccoli is quite comfortable, I have to say, like sorta like a joystick.

Yeah that I I when you were holding that before, it actually looked yeah.

Yeah. That looked really good.

I don't know. So.

Are there any fruits that look like broccoli, no?

Uh.

Not that I can think of. Rhubarb..

Rhubarb.

I think that broccoli is my favourite actually.

These obscure fruits.

Yeah.

Uh despite the.

I think we needn't.

What if um the it was just patterns on like we we chose the shape or the sh shape could be whatever we wanted and then it would just be like a design on the rubber.

Huh?

You know like like just a printed yeah or coloured yeah.

Oh okay.

So it's just colour, and not necessarily the shape of a strawberry.

Yeah. That could work.

Yeah..

Or I mean we could even have fruit like around.

Yeah.

I mean.

Yeah. I dunno.

But if we if we need.

Yeah and just have the colour match or something.

yeah. And if we wanna incorporate the fruit thing somehow, there might be.

I mean if it if it in if it uh conflicts with the comfort of actually holdi holding the.

Yeah.'Cause yeah no-one wants to hold a remote that's uncomfortable obviously.

Mm..

Mm.

Or like I dunno, some of'em you can kind of think see as like.

like you could if it was only this you know, if it was shaped like that, and it just had that. But you see the problem is you have to attach that, and this has to be detachable.

Yeah. Yeah.

So like maybe that's just too big

Well see th the reason the broccoli works is you can kinda hold it like that,

because.

which is a nice kind of.

Yeah it's sorta like a joystick.

Yeah.

yeah. But.

I dunno.

I mean is there some way we could make it this kind of shape?

I guess.

'Cause like kind of.

We could make it that shape but just have different colours, and call'em the different fruits.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Or like even.

Dif

We went with shape because we were having fun with the play-dough.

Or even like Yeah like you said, like a joystick like that. You know?

Yeah. Yeah. Like uh we could do I'm trying to think of other sha like fruits that are oddly shaped.

'Cause that, I think I mean that fits the whole round iPod idea.

Yeah.

And you still have the comfort of holding it like that.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah.

Mm.

And you could like if it's like this, you could put fruit designs and stuff on that part.

Yeah. Yeah. Alright.

But I mean it do we have any other ideas about that?

Um.

We could tr I don't know.

Think the critical ones came out to be yeah that one.. Batteries easy to insert for some reason,

which can be easily I think that's not a problem any more.

The batteries are going in the back?

That everyone gave that a one or a two. Yeah they'd probably be either on the front or the side of the remote.

No.

The reason I I ga I didn't give it a one I think I gave it a three because I thought you'd have to like unc clip.

No I imagine there'd be sort of a hatch door,

no you could Just like any other one. Okay. Yeah.

yeah um like on a normal remote.

Right.

So it would probably either in the f no it can't be in the front'cause the I_R_'s right there, but it'd be on one of the sides probably.

Okay.

I think everyone's under three anyway.

Mm.

So I think it's yeah those are the only two points.

Cool. Well Yeah the broccoli I guess wins.

Yeah I'd agree with changing the shape.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um, I was just having fun making strawberries and stuff..

We were a bit off task.

Um so uh I can't think of any So we'll have to like Mm.

Yeah I dunno. You could make the touch pad in th in different shapes, but then that kind of re-designs the whole project like,

It might also sort of annoy people if we get used to having the buttons in one shape.

but you could do like Yeah that's true.

Yeah. And it would probably cost more to produce,'cause they're irregular.

Yeah. Yeah that's true. Mm.

I bet having different colours is a lot cheaper than having different shapes too.

Yeah. Which is why printing might be like just printing the fruit on fruit.

Hmm.

Mm. Not really Well we've done finance evaluation criteria, production evaluation. Um so project evaluation.

Do you want this and we can all No.

I guess we're supposed to discuss um the prod the process of the project and how satisfied oh, oh it's alright. Uh. Yeah.

It's alright yeah?

Um Did you feel there was a lot of room for creativity in the sort of.

Sure.

Yeah.

I did.

I mean fruit and squishiness. How c more creative can you get?.

Yeah.

Sponginess..

The prototype making was very creatively stimulating

and I think we've come up with a product that's fun and meets all the criteria.

And how was our leadership and teamwork?.

I think it was good. We knew what we were doing. It was a very democratic process and everyone got to contribute.

Well I thought my leadership was crap personally.

Well you told us when to start and when to end, and that's all that matters.

Excuse me, am I allowed to say that? Yeah. Um.

I think you were fine.

Yeah, well I'm never gonna do a management position, I know that now.

You did a good job leading.

Um yeah, I thought we all worked very well together.

Yeah we didn't we uh it all c sort of blended quite well.

Yeah.

Yeah I think it more than anything we didn't really have our set roles so much, as we just would be like I don't know, all had ideas about it but.

Yeah. Very democratic. No spats, that was good.

yeah.

No..

Um and the means for like the materials we used, how convenient were they? Like the the pens, the whiteboard,

I mean we used.

Well I'm not a big fan of any Microsoft, PowerPoint or any of this stuff.

Are you a Mac person?.

No no I never touch Macs either.

I just use the Unix or the off market, sort of WordPerfect and all these other things.

Huh.

Hmm.

Which isn't very user-friendly though..

Yeah. Well the problem is if you don't like my new computer never has WordPerfect so I have to go track someone down who has an old disk and then I have to reinstall it. So I have all these documents I can't use now. But yeah I mean I guess it's okay.

I felt like my I dunno if it was just my role, but l but uh I di I thought that my the information that was available to me was kind of just like or maybe it was just the idea that we had. But there's kinda it was kinda like okay, I don't really think I dunno what I'm doing here.

Mm.

So I didn't really think it was helpful. So I kind of just made up my own stuff and I didn't really like the PowerPoint presentations,

Yeah.

so I kind of wrote a lot of notes instead.

Yeah.

But yeah I d I don't really like PowerPoint personally, think it's kinda stupid.

Yeah. I never use it.

Yeah but uh.

I can't say I found everything particularly helpful. Like I.

Yeah.

Yeah.

It didn't really yeah.

It.

My first bit of information was like this child's drawn picture of how a remote works.

I though it was brilliant no?.

Really?.

No mine was really helpful as in my stuff was quite helpful I think.

I mean m my problem.

Yeah it probably does.

So like a f

I think it depends on the role

yeah, yeah.

Yeah I think so.

no?

'Cause my problem was, you guys had access to like they'd put send you to sites and stuff right?

Yeah.

See I couldn't do that, so I didn't really know what you guys were doing. And when you were talking about it I was just like.

you know that's wh that's why I seemed so ignorant when when you were j explaining things,

'cause I.

Yeah well mine was mostly made up except when they told me like you know titanium costs more than wood to make a remote control.

Yeah. Yeah.

As if you'd wanted to.

Yeah. But it must have been quite difficult for them to build a whole um

System. Yeah.

a whole system,

'cause of course they can't give you uh uh anything comparable to the internet for the.

Yeah.

Yeah I mean, it.

Well I think it's interesting how it all went together, like I had the stuff about how me how rubber's cheap, and you have how people want it to be spongy, and.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, huh.

It seems planned you know.

Yeah..

Yeah I kinda thought that um I felt like I would go and like try to use my information, or like I'd make this stupid little presentation and then like I just would end up talking about something completely unrelated

because.

Yeah.

I dunno I felt like I was off-task all the time. But um.

Well I mean we really got into talking about like personal practicalit like it wasn't necessarily what was like we would never have thought of fruit or sponginess you know?

Yeah.

Yeah.

No..

So it's.

If I hadn't been told that fruit was.

But I think that it it might be to see whether people actually all come up with the same thing.

Oh right. given certain information or Just.

Yeah, like if everyone's given the same input.

yeah.

I don't have a clue, anyway.

Mm, mm.

Um what's next? Looks like oh no that's not um.

What do you guys think of the pens?

It's quite.

It asks about that.

They're pretty cool.

Mm.

I wanna s

They're kinda hard to write with though.

Yeah

Yeah.

and I I've f forgotten once or twice to check the box..

I I'd like to see what what it looks like on the.

They're nicer than the pen that I'm using, because like your stuff actually shows up here, rather than having to look at the screen and write.

Mm.

But even so, I dunno.

And new ideas found?

Yeah it's all very new,

Yeah.

no? It's all very new.

Yeah I think I'd like to um I dunno. Like it was the.

Sorry.

I think the microphones are okay when you're sitting down, but like they're kinda clumsy I guess when you're like when you're s going up to the whiteboard like.

Oh yeah. Well they drop off if you like move too much.

Yeah I dunno. But they're they're okay.

But I don't think we're supposed to be testing these microphones. Maybe we are.

Mm.

I don't know..

Uh I think, and I think that uh all this technology like I guess some people must be interested in using it but I can't imagine finding it any more useful than like looking at someone's notes,

Yeah.

Well the thing is, like I actually worked in a company,

or like I dunno.

and I had a role and I had to go to meetings. And like the last thing I would have wanted would be to have to watch a video'cause I missed a meeting. Like usually I missed meetings deliberately.

There's just there's really not that much information that actually goes through a real meeting, like when you're actually at a real meeting in a real company.

Yeah.

It's mostly like rehashing old stuff.

Hm.

And you're sort of going over general stuff that anybody who's sort of on task should already know.

Yeah.

It's like the there's just really not a lot of information that goes through.

Seems kind of like an excessive reiteration.

It seems like way overkill.

Yeah.

Like if I missed a meeting I could probably get it summed up in like one sentence.

Yeah.

I wouldn't need to have to watch like a t two hour video with the sound and the transcript and.

Yeah.

I guess it would be it's gotta be worth it to I'cause I'm just mostly curious about like what kind of person or like company would would really find it useful,'cause can't really imagine, dunno. How about a p a?

Um I dunno.

Well does anyone wanna talk about fruit more while we still have time?.

Any other ideas for.

What what's the end? Are we are we supposed to um you supposed to write a report? Or we ending?

Um we still have time if there's any other input.

Is that the end?

I mean the I think we did really well personally, which is why we've you know, gone through this so quickly.'Cause I mean we've all we all kind of agreed our product is satisfactory, it fits the budget, and it's trendy.

Yeah.

So. Um.

End of meeting. You have to tell her, she.

So I think that's all for today..

Okay we have to fill in all this stuff.

M meeting adjourned.

Stuff stuff stuff.

Meeting adjourned.

Yeah.

I think I've learned not to bring play-dough to meetings..

Yeah..

I think it would be a good idea, I like it..

It's hard enough to get people actually paying attention. Especially if you have food.

So I guess we're supposed to write final reports.'Cause.

All of us?

I don't know. Hmm.

Well there's al eight, nine.

Ooh. Oh ooh.

Hmm. Or is that just me?.

Question: What did the team decide about the shape of the remote control?

Response: The participants decided to change the shape of the remote control from a fruit shape to a more traditional shape, like a joystick. They also decided to make the material of the remote control a squishy, rubber-like material, and to have different colors and patterns on the material to resemble different fruits.

Question: Did the team decide to make the remote control in the shape of a strawberry?

Response: The team briefly discussed the idea of making the remote control in the shape of a strawberry, but they ultimately decided against it since they wanted to change the shape to a joystick-like shape. They also decided to use a squishy, rubber-like material for the remote control, and to have different colors and patterns on the material to resemble different fruits.

Question: Did the team decide to use real fruit in the construction of the remote control?

Response: No, the team did not decide to use real fruit in the construction of the remote control. They decided to use a squishy, rubber-like material for the remote control, and to have different colors and patterns on the material to resemble different fruits.

Question: Why did User Interface dislike the PowerPoint presentations?

Response: User Interface felt that the PowerPoint presentations were not helpful and preferred to write notes instead. They felt that the presentations were not user-friendly and that they ended up discussing unrelated topics during the presentations.

Question: Did the team decide to make the remote control in the shape of a mango?

Response: There is no information in the meeting transcript regarding the team's decision on the shape of a mango for the remote control.

Question: Besides the shape of a joystick, what other shapes did the team consider for the remote control?

Response: The participants considered various shapes for the remote control like strawberry, mango, orange, broccoli, etc. But they wanted to change the shape to a joystick-like shape. They also decided to use a squishy, rubber-like material for the remote control, and to have different colors and patterns on the material to resemble different fruits.

Question: What did User Interface say regarding the budget for the remote control’s material in the meeting?

Response: There is no information in the meeting transcript regarding User Interface's comments on the budget for the remote control's material.

Question: Besides the shape of a joystick and a mango, what other shapes did the team consider for the remote control?

Response: The participants considered various shapes for the remote control like strawberry, mango, orange, broccoli, etc. But they wanted to change the shape to a joystick-like shape. They also decided to use a squishy, rubber-like material for the remote control, and to have different colors and patterns on the material to resemble different fruits.

Question: What was the main goal of the meeting?

Response: The main goal of the meeting was to discuss the detailed design of the remote control, including aspects such as shape, material, and features. The participants also evaluated the project's progress against the initial criteria and discussed their satisfaction with the process.

Question: What was their conclusion about the material for the remote's buttons?

Response: The participants discussed using plastic for the area around buttons and rubber for squishy-like things but no decision was made.


Alright, so I'm - I should read all of these numbers?

OK.

Piece of paper? I could borrow?

Oh yeah.

OK, so uh i um I don't know whether Ami's coming or not um but I think we oughta just get started.

Nancy is uh currently in Berkeley but not here?

Nancy's still stick?

Don't know. Anyway

OK.

Oh, so there you go. Anyway, so my idea f for today and we can uh decide that that isn't the right thing to do was to at spend at least part of the time trying to eh build the influence links, you know which sets of things are uh relevant to which decisions and actually I had uh specific s suggestion to start first with the path ones. The database ones being in some sense less interesting to us although probably have to be done and so to do that so there's and the idea was we were gonna do two things

Is your mike on?

Ah. Oh right, well. Yeah. We were gonna do two things one of which is just lay out the influence structure of what we think influences what

That's funny.

and then as a uh separate but related task uh particularly Bhaskara and I were going to try to decide what kinds of belief nodes are needed in order to um do what we what we need to do. Once so but du we should sort of have all of the uh basic design of what influences what done before we decide exactly how to compute it. So I didn't did you get a chance to look at all yet?

Yeah, I looked at some of that stuff.

Great. OK so let's start with the uh belief - nets, the general influence stuff and then we'll then we'll also at some point break and talk about the techy stuff.

Well I think one could go there's I think we can di discuss everything. First of all this I added, I knew from sort of basically this has to be there right? Um

Oh are you gonna go there or not? Yeah, so one i

Given given uh uh not transverse the castle, the decision is does the person want to go there or is it just

Right, true. Does have to be there. And I'm sure we'll find more as we go that

And Hmm? So Go - there in the first place or not is definitely uh one of the basic ones. We can start with that. Interesting effect. Um Is this basically true or false or maybe we'll get

Well.

Which one?

what?

" Go there ".

m right.

so there is this question about

Here we we actually get just probabilities,

Yeah.

right for each down here.

When we're yeah when we're done. So so

Hmm.

the the reason it might not be true or false is that we did have this idea of when so it's, you know uh current @ @ and so forth and so on or not at all,

Mm - hmm.

right? And so that a decision would be do we want that so you could two different things you could do, you could have all those values for Go - there or you could have Go - there be binary and given that you're going there when.

When. How.

Yeah and so forth.

Why,

So I'll let

yeah.

we'll see.

Hmm?

I mean it seems that you could um uh it seems that those things would be logically independent like you would wanna have them separate or binary, Go - there and then the the possibilities of how to go there because.

OK, that's let's start that way.

because, you know it might be easy to figure out that this person is going to need more film eventually from their utterance but it's much more complex to query when would be the most appropriate time.

Hmm. Hmm. OK. And so I've tried to come up with some initial things one could observe so who is the user? Everything that has user comes from the user model everything that has situation comes from the situation model - A. We should be be clear. But when it comes to sort of writing down when you when you do these things is it here? You sort of have to a write the values this can take.

Right.

And here I was really uh in some s sometimes I was really sort of standing in front of a wall feeling very stupid because um this case it's pretty simple, but as we will see the other ones um for example if it's a running budget so what are the discrete values of a running budget? So maybe my understanding there is too impoverished.

Hmm.

No uh

How can I write here that this is something, a number that cr keeps on changing? But OK. Thus is understandable?

Think so.

Yes.

So here for example.

You've s have you seen this before at all Keith, these belief - net things?

Uh, no, but I think I'm following it. So far.

So here is the the we had that the user's budget may influence the outcome of decisions.

Yeah.

Hmm.

There we wanted to keep sort of a running total of things.

Is this like a number that represents how much money they have left to spend? OK, h well I mean how is it different from user finance?

Um the finance is sort of here thought of as as the financial policy a person carries out in his life, he is he cheap, average, or spendy?

Alright.

And um I didn't come uh maybe a user I don't know, I didn't want to write greediness, but

Yeah. Hmm.

Or cheapness.

Welcome.

User thrift.

Welcome.

Thrift, that's good.

Yeah.

Great.

There it is.

Yeah. So Keith w what's behind this is actually a program that will once you fill all this in actually s solve your belief - nets for you and stuff.

Mm - hmm.

So this is not just a display, this is actually a GUI to a simulator that will if we tell it all the right things we'll wind up with a functioning belief - net at the other end.

OK. OK.

And it's so simple even I can use it.

Wow, that is simple.

OK, so here was OK, I can think of uh people being cheap, average, or spendy or we can even have a a finer scale moderately cheap,

Doesn't matter.

doesn't matter. Agree there but here um I wasn't sure what to write in.

Let's go ahead.

Well, I mean you've written in you've written in what uh seems to be required like what else is is do you want?

If that's permissible then I'm happy.

Well yeah. So here's here's what's permissible is that you can arrange so that the um the value of that is gonna have to be updated and n it's not a belief update, right? It's you took some actions, you spent money and stuff, so the update of that is gonna have to be essentially external to the belief - net. Right?

Yeah.

And then what you're going to need is uh for the things that it influences. Well let's first of all let's see if it does influence anything. And if it does influence anything then you're gonna need something that converts from the the number here to something that's relevant to the decision there. So it could be ra they create different ranges that are relevant for different decisions or whatever but for the moment this is just a node that is conditioned externally and might influence various things.

Hmm. Yeah this is where um OK anyways let's forget it.

Well that's fine. Well anyway, go ahead.

OK, and so this, oh that

The other thing is that um every time that's updated beliefs will have to be propagated but then the question is do you do we wanna propagate beliefs every single time it's updated or only when we need to?

Yeah, that's a good question. And uh does it have a lazy mode? I don't remember.

Uh Well, I mean, in Srini's thing there was this thing there was this um option like proper inferences which suggests that uh doesn't happen, automatically.

Oh right. Yeah. S probably does. Yeah someone has to track that down, but I but uh And and and I think actually uh

I just accidentally Oops.

one of the we w items for the uh user home base uh should be uh essentially non - local. I they're only there for the day and they don't have a place that they're staying.

Well

Oh just uh accidentally erased this, I I just had values here such as uh um is he s we had in our list we had " Is he staying in our hotel? ", " Is he staying with friends? ", and so forth

Yeah.

uh so we're OK.

So it's clear where w w w where we are right now. So my suggestion is we just pick uh

Something down here?

one, you know one uh particular one of the uh well let's do the first first one let's do the one that we sort of already think we did so w that was the of the endpoint?

Mm - hmm. And um Oops.

Is hmm

Ah,

So it's true or false?

No, that's that's a

OK. No no no, EVA.

So

Missed that one.

What's the difference between mode and endpoint?

I thought mode, yeah.

although that

Um mode was um

Well, that's

Mode of transportation?

Yeah.

OK. Also true or false.

Mm - hmm.

No, he has he hasn't filled them in yet, is what's true.

Yeah, OK.

Did I or didn't I?  Ah. Probably nothing done yet, oh I just did it on the upper ones, OK. Makes sense. OK, so this was EVA. Maybe we can think of more things, cross

Yeah.

Climb, rob.

OK.

climb, emerge

No no no, these are ju that's just a point,

Uh

Well some of those are subsumed by approach.

this is ju

Would it be an endpoint if you were crossing over it?

The Charles Bridge, you know.

Yeah, would be a f for a given segment. You know, you y you go first go the town square

Well I eh

No, I mean, if you go to re you know if you go to Prague or whatever one of your your key points that you have to do is cross the Charles Bridge and doesn't really matter which way you cross which where you end up at the end but the part the good part is walking over it, so.

That's subtle, but true. Anyway so let's just leave it three with three for now

Mm - hmm, mmm. Yeah.

and let's see if we can get it linked up just to get ourselves started.

OK, we

You'll see it you'll see something comes up immediately, that the reason I wanna do this.

w well the uh user was uh definitely more likely to enter if he's a local

Right. Right.

more likely to view if he's a tourist um and then of course we had the fact that given the fact that he's thrifty and there will be admission then we get all these cross um

We did, but the three things w that that it contributed to this in fact, the other two aren't up there. so one was the ontology

We'll d what type of building is it?

Yeah.

Yeah.

And the and the third thing we talked about was something from the discourse.

What he has mentioned before.

OK, so this is w Right, so what w I what we seem to need here, this is why it starts getting into the technical stuff

mm - hmm

the way we had been designing this, there were three intermediate nodes uh which were the endpoint decision as seen from the uh user model as seen from the ontology and as seen from the discourse. So each of those the way we had it designed, now we can change the design, but the design we had was there was a decision with the same three outcomes uh based on the th those three separate considerations

mm - hmm

so if we wanted to do that would have to put in uh three intermediate nodes

Uh we can load it up it you know very simple.

So

and then what you and I have to talk about is, OK if we're doing that and they get combined somehow uh how do they get combined? But the they're they're undoubtedly gonna be more things to worry about.

So this was adjusted for this one mode thing.

Oh yes.

Yeah.

So that's w w in our uh in in Johno's sort of pictogram everything that could contribute to whether a person wants to enter, view, or approach something.

Oh, it was called mode, so this this is m mode here means the same as endpoint.

Is now this endpoint.

Right.

OK, why don't we ch can we change that?

We can just rename that, yeah.

Alright. You know, but that was actually, yeah unfortunately that was a um kind of an intermediate versio that's I don't think what we would currently do.

Can I ask about " slurred " and " angry " as inputs to this?

That's a

What why?

Like they're either true or false

The prosody?

OK.

and they uh oh I see.

If the if the person talking is angry or slurs their speech they might be tired or, you know

Mm - hmm. OK. Drunk.

Therefore

And, you know, possibly uh

Less likely to enter.

some,

Hmm.

yeah.

uh I was thinking less likely to view

Yeah. But that's - that seems to, yeah. So so my advice to do is is get this down to what we think is actually likely to to be a a strong influence.

OK.

But yeah, that was what he had in mind.

Right.

So let's think about this this question of how do we wanna handle so there're two separate things. One is uh at least two. One is how do we want to handle the notion of the ontology now what we talked about, and this is another technical thing Bhaskara, is uh can we arrange so that I think we can so that the belief - net itself has properties and the properties are filled in uh from on ontology items. So the let's take the case of the uh this endpoint thing, the notion was that if you had a few key properties like is this a tourist site, you know some kind of landmark is it a place of business uh is it something you physically could enter

Mm - hmm.

OK, et cetera. So that there'd be certain properties that would fit into the decision node and then again as part of the ou outer controlling conditioning of this thing those would be set, so that some somehow someone would find this word, look it up in the ontology, pull out these properties, put it into the belief - net, and then the decision would flow.

Mm - hmm.

Now

Seems to me that we've sort of e em embedded a lot, em embedded a lot of these uh things we had in there previously in in in some of the other final decisions done here, for example if we would know that this thing is exhibiting something um

Right. Right.

if it's exhibiting itself it is a landmark,

Yeah.

meaning more likely to be viewed

Yep.

if it is exhibiting pictures or sculptures and stuff like this, then it's more likely to be entered.

I uh that's I think that's completely right and um I think that's good, right? So what what that says is that we might be able to uh take and in particular so so the ones we talked about were uh exhibiting and selling

Accessibility.

no, accessibility meant

If it's closed one probably won't enter. Or if it's not accessible to a tourist ever the likelihood of that person actually wanting to enter it,

OK.

given that he knows it, of course.

Alright. So let me suggest this. Uh w could you move those up about halfway. Uh The ones that you th And selling I guess.

Yeah, all all of these if it's fixing things selling things, or servicing things

Right. So here here's what it looks like to me. is that you want an intermediate structure which i uh is essentially the or of uh for this purpose of of uh selling, f fixing, or servicing. So that it uh that is, for certain purposes, it becomes important but for this kind of purpose uh one of these places is quite like the other. Does that seem right? So we di

Basic you're basically just merging those for just the sake of endpoint decision?

if we Yes.

Yeah.

Mm - hmm.

So if well it may be more than endpoint decisions, so the idea would be that you might wanna merge those three

These three?

Yeah. Eh ser s uh selling, fixing, and servicing.

Yeah.

What ex um and so either those is true f or false?

Uh Uh well it it i here's where it gets a little tricky.

So

Uh from the belief - net point of view it is from another point of view of course it's interest it's it's important to know what it's selling or servicing and so forth.

Yeah.

So for this decision it's just uh true or false

OK. Yeah.

and in th this is a case where the or seems just what you want.

OK.

That that if any of those things is true then it's the kind of place that you uh

Um more likely to enter.

are more likely to enter.

So you just wanna have them all pointing to a summary thing?

You could, yeah. Yeah, so let's do that. No no, no eh to to an inter no, an intermediate node.

T

Oh, OK.

That's the p part of the idea, is

Um is is that the object type node?

I d

So are they the is it the kind of object that sells, fixes, or services things?

Well, o open up object type and let's see what its values are.

Oh I just created it, it has none so far.

Oh, well OK first of all it's not objects, we called them entities, right?

Yeah. And then we have sort of the um

Let's say I put commercial.

Yeah, I w I was just gonna commercial action inside where people p

Well couldn't I do let's do commercial uh landmark and

And where was the accessible, yeah.

Well accessible I think is different cuz that's tempor that that varies temporally,

Yeah.

whereas this is a

Mm - hmm.

What would a hotel fall under?

I would call that a service, but but I don't know.

Well I mean in terms of entity type?

Say w w well it's co I would s a a again for this purpose I think it's commercial. Someplace you want to go in to do some kind of business.

OK.

Um what does the underscore - T at the end of each of those things signify?

Um things. So places that service things sell things or fix things and pe places that e exhibit things.

Uh - huh. OK. OK. That also points to entity type I guess.

So we're deriving um this the this feature of whether the the main action at this place happens inside or outside or what we're deriving that from what kind of activity is done there? Couldn't you have it as just a primitive feature of the entity?

Well you could, that's a that's a choice.

OK.

So uh

I mean it seems like that's much more reliable cuz you could have outdoor places that sell things and you know indoor places that do something else

Yeah, the problem with it is that it sort of putting in a feature just for one decision,

and Hmm.

now w we may wind up having to do that this i anyway, this i

OK.

at a mental level that's what we we're gonna have to sort out.

OK.

So, you know what does this look like, what are what are uh intermediate things that are worth computing, what are the features we need in order to make all these decisions

Mm - hmm.

and what's the best way to organize this so that um it's clean and and consistent and all that sort of stuff.

OK. I'm just thinking about how people, human beings who know about places and places to go and so on would store this and it would probably you wouldn't just sort of remember that they sell stuff and then deduce from that that it must be going on inside or something.

Well I think an entity maybe should be regard as a vector of several possible things, it can either em do s do sell things, fix things, service things, exhibit things, it can be a landmark at the same time as doing these things,

Mm - hmm.

it's not either or mmm certainly a place can be a hotel and a famous site.

Mm - hmm.

Many come to mind. Things can be generally um a landmark and be accessible. IE a a castle or can be a landmark a or not accessible, some statue

Mm - hmm.

you know can go inside.

OK. Anyway so let me suggest you do something else. Uh which is to get rid get rid of that l long link between who the user and the endpoint.

Could we just move it like this?

No no, I don't want the link there at all.

Oh, OK.

Because what we're gonna want is an intermediate thing which is uh the endpoint decisi the endpoint decision based o on the user models, so what we we what we talked about is three separate endpoint decisions, so let's make a new node

Yeah. Yeah.

Just as a suggestion maybe you could " save as " to keep your old one nice and clean and so you can mess with this one.

Mmm. The old one was not that not that important, I think but

OK, well, not a big deal then.

Let's do it then.

Well the Isn't there a " save as " inside of java base?

But I can just take this

OK.

copy it somewhere else. This was user something

Well this was

or

uh let's p put it this let's do endpoint underbar - U.

end point?

i endpoint, e end poi this is sa

Ah.

it's the endpoint

Gotcha, yeah.

let's say underbar - U, so that's the endpoint decision uh as seen through the

As related from the user model.

Right. So let's let's actually yeah so lin you can link that up to the

Should I rename this too?

uh yeah, so that, I guess that's endpoint uh

It's underscore - E.

underscore - E for entity, and we may change all this, but. Right. And

OK, shouldn't I be able to move them all? No. Or? Can I? Where? What?

Oh I d eh I don't know. Actually, I guess the easiest thing would move mo move the endpoint, well, go ahead. Just do whatever.

Wasn't this possible?

Well.

Yeah.

I think you have to be in move mode before

Uh - huh. OK.

Good. Right.

So now we're looking for user related things that um

Yeah. And uh maybe th maybe it's just one who is the user, I don't know, maybe maybe there's more.

Huh.

Well if he's usi if he's in a car right now what was that people with Harry drove the car into the cafe

Never mind. Uh anyway, this is crude. Now but the now so so but then the question is uh so and and we assume that some of these properties would come indirectly through an ontology, but then we had this third idea of input from the discourse.

Well let's should we finish this,

Sure,

I mean but surely the user interests

OK.

The user thrift, the user budget.

yeah, yeah

Well, maybe, I again, I d well, OK, put em in but what we're gonna wanna do is actually uh

Well is.

Here this was one of my problems we have the user interest is a is a vector of five hundred values, so um That's from the user model,

Oh you mean level of interest?

mm - hmm, no not levels of interest but things you can be interested in.

Well.

somebody else has built this user model.

Oh I see,

Gothic churches versus Baroque townhouses versus

right. So why is it oh it, so it's like a vector of five hundred one's or zero's?

Yea - n is that

Like for each thing are we are you interested in it or not?

yeah uh I I think

I see.

Hmm.

OK. So uh you cou and so here let me give you two ways to handle that. Alright? One is um you could ignore it. But the other thing you could do is have an and this will give you the flavor of the of what you could have a node that's that was a measure of the match between the object's feature, you know, the match between the object the entity, I'm sorry and the user.

Mm - hmm. Uh.

So you could have a k a " fit " node and again that would have to be computed by someone else

Mm - hmm.

but uh so that uh

Just as a mental note uh

Yeah, that's all.

Mm - hmm. And and should we say that this interests eh affects the likelihood of of entering?

Yeah. I mean, we could.

Yeah. And also if it's an expensive place to enter, this may also

OK.

Budget.

User schedule. " Do I have time to go in and climb all the way to the top of the Koelner Dome  or do I just have to " " time to take a picture of the outside? "

Schedule?

Right.

It seems like everything in a user model a affects.

Well that's what we don't wanna do, see that se cuz then we get into huge combinatorics and stuff like that

Yeah.

Mm - hmm.

an

Cuz if the, I mean, and if the user is tired, the user state,

Well

right, it would affect stuff, but I can't see why e anything w everything in the model wouldn't be

Well, but

Right.

Well, that that's we can't do that, so we we're gonna have to

Yeah.

but this is a good discussion, we're gonna have to somehow figure out uh some way to encapsulate that uh so if there's some general notion of for example the uh relation to the time to do this to the amount of time the guy has or something like that is is the uh compatibility with his current state, so that's what you'd have to do, you'd have to get it down to something which uh was itself relatively compact, so it could be compatibility with his current state which would include his money and his time and and his energy

Yeah, just seems like it'd push the problem back a level.

Right.

It does.

Mm - hmm.

Yeah, but

No but, it's more than that, like the the more sort of you break it up like because if you have everything pointing to one node it's like exponential whereas if you like keep breaking it up more and more it's not exponential anymore.

So it yeah, there are two advantages. That's tha there's one technical one

Sh - sh yeah,.

and the other is it it gets used

S so we'd basically be doing subgrouping? Subgrouping, basically into mo

Yeah.

so basically make it more tree like going backwards?

Right.

Yeah.

Right. But it there's two advantages, one is the technical one that you don't wind up with such big exponential uh CBT's,

Bhaskara?

the other is it can be it presumably can be used for multiple decisions.

Mm - hmm.

So that if you have this idea of the compatibility with the requirements of an action to the state of the user one could well imagine that that was u

Right.

not only is it sim is it cleaner to compute it separately but it could be that it's used in multiple places. Anyway th so in general this is the design, this is really design problem.

Yeah.

OK, you've got a signal, a d set of decisions um how do we do this?

What do I have under user state anyhow cuz I named that already something. Oh that's tired, fresh, yeah. Maybe should be renamed into physical state.

Or fat user fatigue even.

Hmm.

That's with a " G "?

Mm - hmm.

Whatever.

Then we can make a user state.

What's th what we're talking about is compatibility. Uh or something, I don't know, but.

I guess the the question uh is It's hard for me to imagine how everything wouldn't just contribute to user state again. Or user compatibility.

Oh but the thing is that we uh uh we had some things that uh

That don't.

that don't

The user interests and the user who who who the user is are completely apart from the fact whether he is tired broke

Sure, but other I thought though the node we're creating right now is user compatibility to the current action, right?

the right

Seems like everything in the user model would contribute to whether or not the user was compatible with something.

Uh maybe not. I mean the that's the the issue is um would Even if it was true in some abstract general sense it might not be true in terms of the information we actually had and can make use of. And anyway we're gonna have to find some way to cl uh get this sufficiently simple to make it feasible.

Maybe um if we look at the if we split it up again into sort of um if we look at the uh the endpoint again we we said that for each of these things there are certain preconditions so you can only enter a place if you are not too tired to do so and also eh have the money to do so if it costs something so if you can afford it and perform it is preconditions. Viewing usually is cheap or free.

Mm - hmm.

Is that always true? I don't know.

Well, with the way we're defining it I think yeah.

W w but that eh viewing it without ent yeah view w with our definition of view it's free cuz you

And so is approaching.

Yeah.

Well what about the Grand Canyon, right? No, never mind. I mean are there are there large things that you would have to pay to get up close to like, I mean never mind, not in the current.

No we have to enter the park.

OK.

Eh almost by definition um paying involves entering,

Yeah.

ge going through some

OK. Right, sure.

Right. Uh So let me suggest we switch to another one, I mean clearly there's more work to be done on this

Mm - hmm.

but I think it's gonna be more instructive to to think about uh other decisions that we need to make in path land. And what they're gonna look like.

So you can save this one as and open up the old one, right and and then everything would be clean. You could do it again.

Why, I think it's worth saving this one but I think I'd I'd like to keep this one

Yeah.

cuz I wanna see if if we're gonna reuse any of this stuff.

Mm - hmm.

Um so this might be What next?

Well you tell me, so in terms of the uh planner what's what's a good one to do?

Well let's th this go there or not I think is a good one.

Uh

Is a very basic one. So what makes things more likely that.

Well the fir see the first thing is, getting back to thing we left out of the other is the actual discourse.

So

So Keith this is gonna get into your world because uh we're gonna want to know you know, which constructions indicate various of these properties

Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm.

s and so I I don't yet know how to do this, I guess we're gonna wind up pulling out uh discourse properties like we have object properties and we don't know what they are yet.

Mm - hmm.

So that that the Go - there decision will have a node from uh discourse, and I guess why don't we just stick a discourse thing up there to be as a placeholder for

We we also had discourse features of course for the endpoint.

Of of course.

Identified that

Yeah.

and so again re that's completely correct, we have the user model, the situation model here, we don't have the discourse model here yet. Much the same way as we didn't we don't have the ontology here.

Well the ontology we sort of said we would pull these various kinds of properties from the ontology like exhibiting, selling, and so forth.

Really.

So in some sense it's it's there.

Mm - hmm.

But the discourse we don't have it represented at all yet.

Yeah. Um This be specific for second year? Um And and we probably will have uh something like a discourse for endpoint.

But if we do it'll have the three values.

Hmm?

It'll have the EVA values if if we have it.

Yeah. Yeah. OK just for starters and here discourse um

For Go - there, probably is true and false, let's say. That's what we talked about.

um well, I think um we're looking at the the little data that we have, so people say how do I get to the castle and this usually means they wanna go there.

Mm - hmm.

So this should sort of push it in one direction

Right.

however people also sometimes say how do I get there in order to find out how to get there without wanting to go there.

Mm - hmm.

And sometimes um people say where is it

Mm - hmm.

because they wanna know where it is but in most cases they probably

Yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that you're you want these two values.

Oh yeah, true. So this is sort of some external thing that takes all the discourse stuff and then says here it's either yep, yay, A, or nay. Yeah. OK?

And they'll be a y uh, a user Go - there and maybe that's all, I don't know.

Situation Go - there, I mean, because it's whether it's open or not.

Mm - hmm.

OK, good.

That definitely interes

Yep.

But that now that kind of um what's the word

Hmm.

um the that interacts with the uh EVA thing if they just wanna view it then it's fine to go there when it's closed whereas if they want to um

Right.

so

Right, so that's that's where it starts getting to be uh uh essentially more interesting, so what uh Bhaskara says which is completely right is if you know that they're only going to view it then it doesn't matter whether it's closed or not

Mm - hmm.

in terms of uh uh you know, whether whether you wanna go there.

The time of day,

Mm - hmm.

right I well, right.

It does matter though if there's like a strike or riot or something.

Absolutely there are other situational things that do matter.

Right. So yeah, that's what I said just having one situational node may not be enough because this that node by itself wouldn't distinguish

Well i i it can have di various values. Yeah, but we eh you you're right it might not be enough.

Yeah, I mean, see I'm I'm thinking that any node that begins with " Go - there " is either gonna be true or false.

Well, what Whoops.

Yeah.

Right.

Ah. I see that could be.

Also, that node, I mean the Go - there s S node would just be fed by separate ones for

Mm - hmm.

you know, there's different things, the strikes and the

Could be. Yeah. N

Like situation traffic and so on.

Yeah, the time of day.

Yeah. Yeah. So so now the other thing that Bhaskara eh pointed out is what this says is that uh there sh should be a link, and this is where things are gonna get very messy from the endpoint uh decision

I guess the final

maybe the t they're final re and, I guess the very bottom endpoint decision uh to the Go - there node. And I don't worry about layout,

Yeah.

I mean then we'll go we'll go nuts but

Mmm.

Mm - hmm.

Maybe we could um have intermediate node that just the Endpoint and the Go - there S node sort of fed into?

Could be, yeah.

Right. Because that's what we, I mean that's why this situation comes up.

Yeah. Well the Go - there, actually the Endpoint node could feed feed into the Go - there S That's right,

Yeah, right.

so the Endpoint node,

Mm - hmm.

make that up t t to the Go - there then

Yeah.

and again we'll have to do layout at some point, but something like that. Now it's gonna be important not to have loops by the way. Uh really important in in the belief worl net world not to have loops

I was just gonna

uh

Yes.

How long does it take you to to compute uh

No it's much worse than that. It if i loo it it it it it's not def i it's not well defined if you're there are loops,

It things don't converge, yeah.

uh R recursive action?

you just you have to there are all sorts of ways of breaking it up so that there isn't uh OK.

Uh but this isn't, this is this line is just coming from over here.

Yeah.

Yeah, no it's not a loop yet, I'm just saying we we, in no, in

Yeah. Well, but the good thing is we we could have loopy belief propagation which we all love.

Mmm.

Right. OK, so anyway, so that's another decision. Uh what's what's another decision you like?

OK, these have no parents yet, but I guess that sort of doesn't matter. Right?

Well, the idea is that you go there, you go comes from something about the user from something about the situation and the uh the discourse is is a mystery.

I mean this is sort of This comes from traffic and so forth, yeah. Sh - Should we just make some

Sure, if you want.

um if there's parking maybe Mmm Oh who cares. OK. And if he has seen it already or not and so forth,

Right.

OK. Um and discourse is something that sort of should we make a Keith note here?

Sure.

That sort of comes from Keith.

Mm - hmm.

Just sort of so we don't forget. Oops. Have to get used to this. OK, whoops.

Um actually.

And then also the discourse endpoint, I I guess endpoint sub - D is if you wanna make it consistent.

Wh - ah.

Mm - hmm.

Um actually is this the the right way to have it where um go there from the user and go there from the situation just sort of don't know about each other but they both feed the go there decision because isn't the, I mean

I think so. S

uh, hmm OK. But that still allows for the possibility of the of the user model affecting our decision about whether a strike is the sort of thing which is going to keep this user away from.

Maybe not, a Right.

That all that that kind of decision making happens at the Go - there node.

Uh y you yeah you i you if you needed to do that.

Uh. If you needed it to do that.

Yeah.

But uh OK I was just thinking I guess maybe I'm conflating that user node with possible possible asking of the user

Yeah.

you know hey there's a strike on, uh does that affect whether or not you wanna go or something

Ah. Good point, I don't I don't know how we're going to t uh

or Yeah, so that might not come out of a user model but, you know, directly out of interaction.

Right. Uh I gu yes my curr you know, don't yeah yeah yeah that's enough.

Yeah.

Uh My current idea on that would be that each of these decision nodes has questions associated with it.

Mm - hmm.

And the question wouldn't itself be one of these conditional things

OK.

you know, given that you know there's a strike do you still wanna go?

Yeah.

But uh if you told him a bunch of stuff, then you would ask him do you wanna go?

Mm - hmm. OK.

But I think trying to formulate the conditional question, that sounds too much.

Right, right. Yeah. Right, sure, OK.

To me.

Mm - hmm.

Alright, but let me let let's stay with this a minute

But

because I want to do a little bit of organization. Before we get more into details. The organization is going to be that uh the flavor of what's going on is going to be that uh as we s e sort of going to this detail indeed Keith is going to to worry about the various constructions that people might use

Mm - hmm.

and Johno has committed himself to being the parser wizard,

Alright.

so what's going to happen is that eventually like by the time he graduates, OK uh they'll be some sort of system which is able to take the discourse in context and have outputs that can feed the rest of belief - net. I j wa I I assume everybody knows that, I just wanna you know, get closure that that'll be the game then,

Mm - hmm.

so the semantics that you'll get out of the discourse will be of values that go into the various discourse - based decision nodes. And now some of those will get fancier like mode of transportation and stuff so it isn't by any means uh necessarily a simple thing that you want out. So uh if there is an and there is mode of transportation

And it there's a sort of also a split if you loo if you blow this up and look at it in more detail there's something that comes from the discourse in terms of what was actually just said what's the utterance go giving us

Yeah.

and then what's the discourse history give us.

Yeah, well that, well, we'll have to decide uh how much of th where that goes.

Mm - hmm.

That's uh two things then.

Mm - hmm.

Mmm.

an and it's not clear yet. I mean it could be those are two separate things, it could be that the discourse gadget itself integrates em as which would be my guess that you'd have to do see in order to do reference and stuff like that um you've gotta have both the current discourse and the context to say I wanna go back there,

Mm - hmm.

wow, what does that mean and uh

Mm - hmm

Now. Mm - hmm.

Alright. So

But is th is this picture that's emerging here just my wish that you have noticed already for symmetry or is it that we get for each each decision on the very bottom we sort of get the sub - E, sub - D, sub - U and maybe a sub - O " O " for " ontology " um meta node

I don't know.

but it might just

It could be.

could be

This is this is getting into the thing I wanna talk about next,

so this

which is s if that's true uh how do we wanna combine those? O or when it's true?

but this eh w wou wou would be nice though that, you know, we only have at most four at the moment um arrows going f to each of the uh bottom decisions.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And four you we can handle.

No.

Yeah.

It's too much?

Well i i it see i if it's fou if it's four things and each of them has four values it turns out to be a big CPT, it's not s completely impossi I mean it's it's not beyond what the system could solve but it's probably beyond what we could actually uh write down. or learn.

Right, true.

Uh but, you know it's four to the fourth. It's pretty big. Uh.

Two fifty - six,

Yeah.

is that what that

Yeah, I mean it's and I don't think it's gonna g e I don't think it'll get worse than that by the way, so le that's a that's a good

Mmm yeah.

But but four didn't we decide that all of these had true or false? So is it's four

Uh for go there, but not f but not for the other one's three values for endpoint already.

Yeah.

Yeah, I mean you need actually three to the five because uh well I mean if if it has four inputs and then it itself has three values

Right.

so I mean it can get big fast.

Um for endpoint? No it's it's sh

EV - it's the EVA.

yeah, down here, but this one only has two.

No.

No it still has three,

Since ta they will still have three.

EVA.

Each so you're uh uh from each point of view you're making the same decision.

Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm.

So from the point of view of the ob of the entity

Want to view that, yeah yeah. C sl

Yeah.

yeah

This and also, I mean, the other places where, like for example consider endpoint view, it has inputs coming from user budget, user thrift

Right.

so even

Those are not necessarily binary. S so we're we're gonna have to use some t care in the knowledge engineering to not have this explode. And in fact I think it doesn't in the sense that um Read it, you know actually with the underlying semantics and stuff I think it isn't like you have two hundred and fifty - six different uh ways of of thinking about whether this user wants to go to some place. Alright. So we we just have to figure out what the regularities are and and code them. But um What I was gonna suggest next is maybe we wanna work on this a little longer but I do want to also talk about the thing that we started into now of uh well it's all fine to say all these arrows come into the si same place what rule of combination is used there.

Mm - hmm.

So th yes they so these things all affect it,

Right.

how do they affect it? And belief - nets have their own beliefs about uh what are good ways to do that. So is it it's it's clearer n clear enough what the issue is,

Right.

right? So do we wanna switch that now or we wanna do some more of this?

R basically w we just need to sort of in order to get some closure on this figure out how we're gonna get this picture sort of uh completely messy.

Well, here he here's one of the things that that I th you sh you no, I don't know how easy it is to do this in the interface but you it would be great if you could actually just display at a given time uh all the things that you pick up, you click on " endpoint ", OK and everything else fades

Mm - hmm.

and you just see the links that are relevant to that. And I does anybody remember the GUI on this?

Uh d I would almost say the other way to do that would be to open u or make you know N - many belief - nets and then open them every time you wanted to look at a different one

Mm - hmm.

vers cuz uh

It's probably pretty easy do it to do it in HTML, just.

Yeah, but

Uh

HTML?

Yeah I have each of these thing each of the end belief - nets be be a page and then you click on the thing and then li consider that it's respective,

Yeah the well the b

OK.

but

anyway so uh it clear that even with this if we put in all the arrows nobody is gonna be able to read the diagram.

Yeah.

Alright, so e we have to figure out some eh eh uh basically display hack or something to do this because anyway I I let me consi suggest that's a s not a first - order consideration, we have two first - order considerations which is what are the uh influences A, A, and B how do they get combined mathematically, how do we display them is an issue, but um

I don't, yeah I just don't think this has been designed to support something like that.

Yeah. Yeah, I I mean, it might soon, if this is gonna be used in a serious way like java base then it might soon be necessary to uh start modifying it for our purposes.

Right. Yeah, and Um I that seems like a perfectly feasible thing to get into, but um we have to know what we want first. OK, so why don't you tell us a little bit about decision nodes and what what the choices might be for these?

So Ah, sorry. I guess that's

You can technically wear that as you're talking.

Yeah, it's right, I guess I can do that.

Darn.

Put it in your, yeah.

I guess this board works fine. So um recall the basic problem which is that um you have a belief - net and you have like a lot of different nodes all contributing to one node. Right? So as we discussed specifying this kind of thing is a big pain and it's so will take a long time to write down because for example if these S have three possibilities each and this has three possibilities then you know you have two hundred and forty - three possibilities which is already a lot of numbers to write down. So what um helps us in our situation is that these all have values in the same set, right? These are all like saying EV or A, right? So it's not just a generalized situation like I mean basically we wanna just take a combination of we wanna view each of these as experts ea who are each of them is making a decision based on some factors and we wanna sort of combine their decisions and create you know, um sorta weighted combination.

Hmm. ROVER, the ROVER decision.

The what decision?

ROVER. All of their outputs combined to make a decision.

Hmm.

Yeah. Yeah. So the problem is to specify the uh so the conditional property of this given all those, right? That's the way belief - nets are defined, like each node given its parents, right? So um that's what we want, we want for example P of um let's call this guy Y and let's call these X - one, X - two XN, right. So we want probability that Y equals, you know, for example um E given that these guys are I'll just refer to this as like X um hat or something, uh the co like all of them? Given that for example the data says you know, A, V, A, E, or something right?

Yep.

So we would like to do this kind of combination.

Alright, so um Is that uh I yeah, I just wanna make sure everybody is with us before he goes on.

I think so, yeah.

It's it's cl e is is it clear what he wants to compute?

Mm - hmm.

Right. So, right. So Basically um what we don't wanna do is to for every single combination of E and V and A and every single letter E, s give a number

Mm - hmm.

because that's obviously not desirable. What we wanna do is find some principled way of um saying what each of these is and we want it to be a valid probability distribution, so we want it to um add up to one, right?

Hmm.

So those are the two things that we uh need. So what uh I guess, what Jerry suggested earlier was basically that we, you know view these guys as voting and we just take the uh we essentially take um averages, right? So for example here two people have voted for A, one has voted for V, and one has voted for E, so we could say that the probabilities are, you know, probability of being E is one over four, because one person voted for E out of four and similarly, probability of so this is probability of E s and then probability of A given all that is um two out of four and probability of V is one out of four. Right? So that's step that's the uh yeah that's the that's the basic uh thing. Now

Um Yeah.

Is that all OK?

And that one outcome, that's

What?

it's X X - one voted for A X - two voted for V

Mm - hmm.

and so forth?

Y right. Yep.

Yeah.

Yeah.

S so this assumes symmetry and equal weights and all this sort of things, which may or may not be a good assumption,

That's the outcome.

Mm - hmm. Right.

so that

Yeah. Yeah. So step two is um right. So we've assumed equal weights whereas it might turn out that you know, some w be that for example, what the um the actual the uh verbal content of what the person said, like what uh what might be uh somehow more uh important than the uh

X - one matters more i than X - two or

Right. Sure, so we don't wanna like give them all equal weight so currently we've been giving them all weight one fourth so we could replace this by uh W - one, W - two, W - three, and W - four

Hmm.

right? And in order for this to be a valid probability distribution for each um X - hat, we just need that the W's sum to one. So they can be for example, you know you you could have point one, point three, point two, and point four, say.

That's one.

And that'd be one. So that um also seems to work fine. And uh

So I jus just to make sure I understand this, so in this case um we would still compute the average?

You'd compute the weighted average, so the probability of E would be uh

OK, so so it'd be so in this case the probability that Y equals A would be uh  W one times.

Point three.

or A or let's see, one full quarter times point one

Not one quarter,

No.

so these numbers have been replaced with point one, point three, point two, and point four. So you can view these as gone.

OK.

Probability of

OK.

Yeah. Yeah. OK. So, alright. So this is uh step two. So the next possibility is that um we've given just a single weight to each expert, right, whereas it might be the case that um in certain situations one of the experts is more uh reliable and in certain situations the other expert is more reliable. So the way this is handled is by what's called a mixture of experts, so what you can have is you augment these diagrams like this so you have a new thing called " H ", OK? This is a hidden variable. And what this is is it gets its input from X - one, X - two, X - three, and X - four, and what it does is it decides which of the experts is to be trusted in this particular situation. Right? And then these guys all come here. OK. So this is sightly uh more complicated. So what's going on is that um this H node looks at these four values of those guys and it decides in given these values which of these isn't likely to be more reliable or most reliable. So H produces some you know, it produces a number, either one, two, three, or four, in our situation, right? Now this guy he looks at the value of H say it's two, and then he just selects the uh thing. That's all there is to say, I guess about it. Right, so you can have a mixture that

Mm - hmm.

Right.

So so the function of the thing that comes out of H is very different from the function of the other inputs. It's driving how the other four are interpreted. OK.

Yeah. Yeah.

So H passes a vector on to the next node?

It could.

It could? A vector of the weights as the se

Yeah, it could

oh.

Sorry?

Well a vector with three zero's and one one, right?

Oh it's basically to tell the bottom node which one of the situations that it's in or which one of the weighting systems

Right, so I mean the way you desc

W I was just, if you wanted to pay attention to more than one you could pass a w a weighting s system though too, couldn't you? OK.

Um Does H have to have another input to tell it alpha, beta, whatever, or is the that's determined by what the experts are saying, like the type of situ OK. Hmm. OK. OK. I mean It it just seems that like without that that outside input that you've got a situation where, you know, like if if uh X - one says no, you know, a low value coming out of X - on or i if X - one says no then ignore X - one, you know, I mean that seems like that'd be weird,

Yeah, well could be things like if X - two and X - three say yes then i ignore X - one also.

right? Oh, OK. OK. Alright, right.

Oh The situations that H has, are they built into the net or OK, so they they could either be hand coded or learned or OK.

Yeah.

Based on training data, OK.

Yeah. Yes.

So you specify one of these things for every one of those possi possible situations. Oh yeah.

Yeah. Um Well, I mean to learn them we need data, where are we gonna get data? Well I mean we need data with people intentions, right?

Right, right.

Which is slightly tricky. Right.

Uh - huh.

Mm - hmm. But what's the data about like, are we able to get these nodes from the data?

Like how thrifty the user is, or do we have access to that? Mm - hmm. Oh right. Oh good. OK.

Yeah.

Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. OK.

Yeah, but that's my question, like how do we I mean, how do we have data about something like um um endpoint sub - E, or endpoint sub uh you know s S?

Well, basically you would say, based on in this dialogue that we have which one of the things that they said eh whether it was the entity relations or whatever was the thing that determined what mode it was,

Mmm. Mmm.

right?

So this is what we wanna learn. Yep. Right. Hmm. Yeah. I don't think, well you have a can you bring up the function thing? Um w where is the thing that allows you to sort of

That's on the added variable, isn't it?

Oh function properties, is that it? Hmm, I guess not. Yeah, that's

No.

Right. OK. And um it so e either it'll allow us to do everything which I think is unlikely, I think more likely it'll allow us to do very few of these things and in that case we'll have to um just write up little things that allow you to um create such CPU's on your own in the java base format. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I was assuming that's what we'd always do because yeah I was assuming that's what we'd always do, it's Right. Yeah.

Ah. Well in terms of java base I think it's basically what you see is what you get in I don't yeah, I would be surprised if it supports anything more than what we have right here.

So Yeah. Yeah. By the way um uh just talking about uh about that general end of things uh is there gonna be data soon from what people say when they're interacting with the system and so on? Like, I mean, what kind of questions are being given being asked? Cuz OK. Yeah yeah. OK. OK. Fey, you mean. OK. OK. O OK. OK. I'm just wondering, because in terms of, you know, I mean uh w the figure I was thinking about this figure that we talked about, fifty constructions or whatever that's uh that's a whole lot of constructions and um you know, I mean one might be f fairly pleased with getting a really good analysis of five maybe ten in a summer so, I mean I know we're going for sort of a rough and ready. Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. OK. OK. I mean, I I I I was uh I was talking about the, you know, if you wanted to do it really in detail and we don't really need all the detail for what we're doing right now but anyway in terms of just narrowing that task you know which fifty do I do, I wanna see what people are using, so Well, it will inspire me. Right, sure sure. Right. Yeah, sure. Sure. Yeah. OK. Touche. Good enough.

Question: Was the Go-There decision made dependent on the value of the endpoint decision as seen from the user model, from the ontology, and from the discourse?

Response: Yes, the Go-There decision was made dependent on the endpoint decision as derived from the user model, the ontology, and the discourse.

Question: What exactly do they mean by the endpoint decision derived from the ontology?

Response: The endpoint decision derived from the ontology is the decision based on certain properties of the entity, such as whether it is a tourist site, a place of business, or a place that can be physically entered.

Question: What other factors were considered when deriving the endpoint decision?

Response: The endpoint decision was also derived from the user model, which took into account the user's thrift, budget, and interest level in the location. Additionally, the discourse was analyzed to determine the user's intent, which also influenced the endpoint decision.

Question: Did the participants suggest creating a hidden variable called "H" to determine which expert is considered more reliable under different conditions?

Response:
Yes, the participants suggested creating a hidden variable called "H" to determine which expert is considered more reliable under different conditions.

* The value of "H" is derived from the values of the other nodes in the belief net.
* "H" then selects which of the experts is most reliable in the given situation.
* The output of "H" is a vector with three zeros and one one, indicating which expert should be trusted.

Question: What was decided regarding the best way to display the results of the belief net, considering that the current display method is insufficient?

Response: The participants did not come to a conclusion regarding the best way to display the results of the belief net. They recognized that the current display method is insufficient, but they did not have a clear solution or determine the next steps to address this issue.

Question: What did the participants recommend to do when discussing how to organize the belief-net results?

Response: The participants recommended organizing the belief-net results by grouping them into subcategories based on their decision nodes. Each subcategory would include results from the user model, the ontology, and the discourse. This organization would help to make the results more manageable and easier to understand.

Question: What did the participants recommend doing when discussing how to present the belief-net results?

Response: The participants recommended displaying the results of the belief net in a manner that allows users to focus on one decision node at a time, with all relevant information related to that decision displayed together. This could be achieved by fading out all other information and only displaying the links and nodes relevant to the selected decision node.

Question: During the meeting, were there any issues or questions raised that remained unresolved or unanswered at the end of the discussion?

Response:
Yes, there were issues and questions that remained unresolved or unanswered at the end of the meeting:

* The participants did not reach a consensus on the best way to display the results of the belief net.

* They also did not determine how to address the issue that the belief net could become too complex and difficult to manage as more inputs are added.

* Additionally, the participants did not discuss how to handle situations where there is a lack of data to train the belief net.

Question: Why did the participants believe that creating a hidden variable called "H" would be beneficial?

Response:
The participants believed that creating a hidden variable called "H" would be beneficial because:

* It would allow the belief net to determine which expert is considered more reliable under different conditions.
* It would help to improve the accuracy of the belief net's predictions.
* It would make the belief net more robust and adaptable to new situations.

Question: How does the creation of the hidden variable "H" enhance the reliability of the belief net's predictions?

Response:
The creation of the hidden variable "H" enhances the reliability of the belief net's predictions in the following ways:

* It allows the belief net to take into account the reliability of different experts in different situations.
* It helps to reduce the influence of unreliable experts on the belief net's predictions.
* It makes the belief net more robust and adaptable to new situations, where the reliability of experts may change.