skip to main content
10.1145/503032.503042acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespepmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Mixed-initiative interaction = mixed computation

Published:14 January 2002Publication History

ABSTRACT

We show that partial evaluation can be usefully viewed as a programming model for realizing mixed-initiative functionality in interactive applications. Mixed-initiative interaction between two participants is one where the parties can take turns at any time to change and steer the flow of interaction. We concentrate on the facet of mixed-initiative referred to as 'unsolicited reporting' and demonstrate how out-of-turn interactions by users can be modeled by 'jumping ahead' to nested dialogs (via partial evaluation). Our approach permits the view of dialog management systems in terms of their support for staging and simplifying inter-actions; we characterize three different voice-based interaction technologies using this viewpoint. In particular, we show that the built-in form interpretation algorithm (FIA) in the VoiceXML dialog management architecture is actually a (well disguised) combination of an interpreter and a partial evaluator.

References

  1. 1.J. Allen. Natural Language Understanding. Benjamin Cummings, 1995. Second Edition. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. 2.J. Allen, D. Byron, M. Dzikovska, G. Ferguson, L. Galescu, and A. Stent. Towards Conversational Human-Computer Interaction. AI Magazine, 2001. to appear. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. 3.J. Allen, C. Guinn, and E. Horvitz. Mixed-Initiative Interaction. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Vol. 14(5):pages 14-23, Sep-Oct 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. 4.L. Boyer, P. Danielsen, J. Ferrans, G. Karam, D. Ladd, B. Lucas, and K. Rehor. Voice eXtensible Markup Language: VoiceXML. Technical report, VoiceXML Forum, May 2000. Version 1.00.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.H. Brunner, G. Whittemore, K. Ferrara, and J. Hsu. An Assessment of Written/Interaction Dialogue for Information Retrieval Applications. Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 7:pages 197-249, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.M. Coulthard. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. Longman, London, 1977.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.E. Goffman. Replies and Responses. Language in Society, Vol. 5:pages 257-313, 1976.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. 8.S. Haller and S. McRoy. Computational Models for Mixed Initiative Interaction (Papers from the 1997 AAAI Spring Symposium). Technical Report SS-97-04, AAAI/MIT Press, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.N. Jones, C. Gomard, and P. Sestoft. Partial Evaluation and Automatic Program Generation. Prentice Hall International, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.D. Jurafsky and J. Martin. Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition. Prentice Hall, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.S. Levinson. Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press, 1983. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.S. McGlashan, D. Burnett, P. Danielsen, J. Ferrans, A. Hunt, G. Karam, D. Ladd, B. Lucas, B. Porter, K. Rehor, and S. Tryphonas. Voice eXtensible Markup Language: VoiceXML. Technical report, VoiceXML Forum, October 2001. Version 2.00.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.D. Novick and S. Sutton. What is Mixed-Initiative Interaction? In S. Haller and S. McRoy, editors, Procedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Computational Models for Mixed Initiative Interaction, pages 114-116. AAAI/MIT Press, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.Perez-Quinones, M.A. and Sibert, J.L. A Collaborative Model of Feedback in Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'96), pages 316-323. Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.N. Ramakrishnan and S. Perugini. The Partial Evaluation Approach to Information Personalization. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, August 2001. Communicated for publication. Also available as Technical Report cs.IR/0108003, Computing Research Repository (CoRR) at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/ cs.IR/0108003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.F. van Harmelen and A. Bundy. Explanation-Based Generalisation = Partial Evaluation. Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 36(3):pages 401-412, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. 17.M. Veloso, J. Carbonell, A. P~rez, D. Borrajo, E. Fink, and J. Blythe. Integrating Planning and Learning: The PRODIGY Architecture. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 7(1):pages 81-120, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Mixed-initiative interaction = mixed computation

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            PEPM '02: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGPLAN workshop on Partial evaluation and semantics-based program manipulation
            January 2002
            146 pages
            ISBN:158113455X
            DOI:10.1145/503032

            Copyright © 2002 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 14 January 2002

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • Article

            Acceptance Rates

            PEPM '02 Paper Acceptance Rate11of22submissions,50%Overall Acceptance Rate66of120submissions,55%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader