slides1

advertisement

Evolució dels sistemes de diàleg

Millorar el procés de desenvolupament del sistema

Millorar la funcionalitat

– Utilizació en aplicacions més complexes

– Expansió de la cobertura lingüística

– Millora del controlador de diàleg

• Utilització del model del diàleg

• Utilització del model de tasques del sistema

– Integració amb altres modes: multimodalitat

Evolució

Millorar el procés de desenvolupament del sistema

Transportables a dominis diferents

• Sistemes i eines per desenvolupar mòduls comunicatius

– INKA: Interfícies per construir Sistemes Experts

• Utilitza un Llenguate Structurat d’Interfícies

NL-MENU: Interfícies per consultar bases de dades

– NAT: Interfícies per diferents llenguatges i aplicacions

Evolució

Utilizació en aplicacions més complexes

Interfícies en LN per sistemes basats en el coneixement

El coneixement conceptual implicat és més complexe

Es necessiten noves functionalitats

– Preguntes sobre l’aplicació

• El coneixement lingüístic necessari és més gran

Incorporació de la representació del domini

Evolució

Expansió de la cobertura linguística

Eficiència Cobertura Reusabilitat

Basats en templetes orientats a la tasca

Bona Pobre Difícil

Recursos

Bona Rica Fàcill a diferents aplicacions

Recursos generals Pobre Rica Fàcil

Integració amb altres modes: multimodalitat

• La integració de speech permet una comunicació més amistosa i noves aplicacions

– VOYAGER (MIT), Office Manager (CMU), MASK

(Multimodal Multimedia Automated Service Kiosk), ATIS (MIT,

CMU), Railtel, Sundial, Verbmobil

• La integració amb menus, gràfics i gest millora la communicació en moltes aplicacions

– MMI2 (Multimodal Interface for Man Machine Interaction)

MATIS (Multimodal Airline Travel Information System)

– COMET (Coordinated Multimedia Explanation Testbed),

ALFresco, CUBRICON

The functionality of GISE

GISE: Generador de Interfaces para Sistemas Expertos

• It supports NL communication with

KBSs

• It automatically adapts

– General linguistic knowledge

• Represented in a Linguistic Ontology

– To application communication tasks

• Represented in a Conceptual Ontology

Aim of the study

GISE, a system for improving NL Interaction with Knowledge Based Systems

• Reducing the run-time requirements for processing user interventions

• Guiding the user about the system capabilities

• Reducing the cost of developing the grammar and lexicon

• The GISE NLI uses:

- An application-restricted grammar and lexicon

- A menu-system

• GISE automatically adapts

- General linguistic knowledge to the application knowledge represented in a Conceptual Ontology

GISE

The different types of knowledge involved in the generation process

• Conceptual knowledge: Conceptual Ontology

– Application knowledge appearing in communication

– Communication tasks: general and specific

• Linguistic knowledge: Linguistic Ontology

– Linguistic structures expressing the communication tasks

• Control knowledge: Control Rules

– Controlling the process of relating general linguistic knowledge to application knowledge

GISE

Obtaining the applicationrestricted linguistic resources

Step 1.

Providing the application domain-specific knowledge

Step 2.

Adapting the general communication tasks to cover application knowledge

Step 3.

Adapting general linguistic knowledge to express the application communication tasks

The functionality of GISE

Obtaining the applicationrestricted linguistic resources

Data Description

Conceptual Ontology

General knowledge

Application knowledge

Control Description

Control rules

Dialogue system

Application grammar

Application lexicon

Linguistic Ontology

General knowledge

Application lexicon

The architecture of GISE

The Conceptual Ontology

• There are 3 basic entities represented in 3 separated taxonomies

– Concepts

– Attributes

• Describing the concepts

• They are classified according to a syntacicosemantic taxonomy

– Operations

• The communication tasks consist of the expression of allowed operations over the CO concepts

Conceptual Ontology

The syntactico-semantic taxonomy of attributes

• Generalization of the relations between

– Application knowledge in the Conceptual

Ontology

– Linguistic knowledge in the Linguistic

Ontology

• Each class is related to the linguistic structures expressing the consulting and filling of the attributes in the class

Conceptual Ontology

The basic attribute taxonomy

• participants : who_does what_object who_object

• being: is

• possession: has

• descriptions and relationships between two or more objects : of

• related processes: does

Conceptual Ontology

TOP

CONCEPT ATTRIBUTE OPERATION

TRANSPORT lex: (transporte) departure arrival departuretime arrivaltime price

TRAIN BUS

Conceptual Ontology

OF_TIME

ATTRIBUTE

OF

OF_QUANTITY

OF_COST

ARRIVALTIME lex: (llegar,...) unit: h/m

DEPARTURETIME lex: (hora_salida, salir,..) unit: h/m

PRICE lex: (precio,..) unit: Euro

Conceptual Ontology

TOP

CONCEPT ATTRIBUTE OPERATION

TRAIN lex: (tren) departure arrival departuretime arrivaltime price

MINIMUM_ATTRIBUTE

OF_TIME OF_COST

_VALUE_O concept attribute

Which <concept_name>

<attribute_verb> first?

Which is the cheapest

<concept_name> ?

Which train departures first?

Which train arrives first?

Which is the cheapest train?

Conceptual Ontology

Operations

• Operations are represented as CO objects

– The attributes describing these objects represent their parameters and their preconditions (the conditions that must hold for an operation to be executed)

• They are classified as

Simple or complex

Constructive

Creating a conceptual instance, filling attributes

Consultative

Consulting the value of an instance attribute

The architecture of GISE

The Linguistic Knowledge

• It is organized following the basic principles of the

Nigel grammar

A large systemic functional grammar of English

It is based on Hallidays’s work

It has been used with GUM to generate NL

• It covers the Spanish communication with KBSs

• It is represented as an ontology

The grammar and lexicon generated

Their size is not large -> Simple parsing

They cover only the domain communication tasks

They incorporate dynamic categories

They incorporate information from the

Conceptual Ontology -> Simple semantic interpretation

In the lexical entries

In the features augmenting the categories

In the preconditions associated with the rules

Linguistic Ontology

Linguistic knowledge is organized in two dimensions:

Rank: The scale of the grammatical structures represented

Clause

Group

Word

Metafunction: The type of meaning

Interpersonal: The type of interaction

Ideational: The propositional meaning and content

Textual: The information organization

The architecture of GISE

The control rules

• They control the process of adapting the general linguistic knowledge to applications

• They establish general relations between

:

Concepts and operations in the CO

CO and LO objects

• Their form is: conditions ----> actions

• They are implemented in PRE (Production

Rules Environment)

The control rules

Adapting the general communication tasks to cover application knowledge

for each CONCEPT in ONTOLOGY do generate_CO_operations_ instance_modifying_concept ( CONCEPT ) generate_CO_operations_ instance_consulting_concept ( CONCEPT ) endfor

The control rules

Adapting general linguistic knowledge to express the application communication tasks

for each OPERATION_INSTANCE in ONTOLOGY do generate_CLAUSE_instances ( OPERATION_INSTANCE ) for each ARGUMENT in OPERATION_INSTANCE do generate_GROUP/WORD_instances ( OPERATION_INSTANCE , ARGUMENT ) endfor endfor

The control rules

The basic set of rules

• It controls the generation of grammars and lexicons for each application

• It contains 48 rules organized in 8 rulesets

• It covers different types of interfaces

Interfaces supporting descriptions

Interfaces supporting consults

Interfaces supporting consults and descriptions

• It can be enlarged easily

The control rules

A rule of the ruleset creating_instance

(rule cio ruleset creating_instance priority 1 control forever

(object ^con ?con ^pcc ?pcc)

--->

(?crinno := (create-name ‘criwno ?con)

(?concrinno := (create-object ?crinno ‘crinno))

(?oparg := (add-slots ?crinno ‘((con ?con)(pcc ?pcc))))

...

)

The dialogue system

Dialogue sytem

Menu system

Parser Grammar

Lexicon

Dialogue

Controller

Communication Manager

User

Conceptual

Ontology

Application

The grammar and lexicon

• They are obtained from the LO objects

• They are represented in the definiteclause grammar (DCG) formalism because:

– Definite-clause grammars are more expressive than conventional context-free grammars

– They can be efficiently parsed

– They are automatically generated

The lexicon

A lexical entry representing the verb ser

String Category Interpretation es verbser (syn(num(s),tense(p))) (((l,X),(l,Y)), (X,Y) ) syn tactic num ber s ingular tense p resent

The lexicon

A lexical entry representing the concept

ARCHITECT

• String un_arquitecto

• Category indefngcon (syn(gen(m),num(s)), sem(con(architect))) syn tactic gen der m asculine num ber s ingular

• Semantic Interpretation sem antic con cept architect architect

The lexicon

Dynamic entries

Representing instances of concepts

Category function pngi (sem(con(person))) instance_of(person)

Representing values of attributes requested to the user during communication

Category function defngattrof (sem(con(person), attr(name))) name

Representing all possible values of an attribute defngvalofcause (sem(con(requirementobuild),attr(reasonotbuilt))) menu(reasonotbuilt)

The lexicon

Dynamic entries

• The number of lexical entries to be considered is reduced

• They allow the introduction of new values during communication

• They guide the user to introduce specialized terms

The parser

• It is based on the Ross version of the

Left-corner algorithm

• It assures there is always a correct choice to continue from a correct prefix

(prefix correctness)

• It can parse

– A word and predicts the set of all possible next words

The Dialogue Controller (DC)

The DC completes and disambiguates the semantic interpretation of the user request

The result is a complete specification of an operation over the Conceptual Ontology

The DC controls the execution of the operation

The DC passes the resulting information to the interface

The Dialogue Controller

The DC completes and disambiguates the semantic interpretation of the user request using:

History of dialogue

Concept and parameters of the previous operations

The Conceptual Ontology

The definition of the operation: mandatory arguments, default values,...

This process is simple when users build the requests using the NL options shown in the screen

– Mistakes and misunderstandings are avoided

Applications of GISE

SIREDOJ, an expert system in law

• Previously its communicative tasks

– were fully integrated with functional tasks

– were based on a set of menus

• Applying GISE improves the communication:

– Complex concepts can be expressed in one sentence

– User-initiative dialogues are allowed

– The size of the linguistic resources is not big:

26 grammar rules and 112 lexical entries

Conclusions

• Main contribution:

– Proposing an organization of the knowledge involved in communication that improves the obtaining of the linguistic resources most appropriate for each application

Conclusions

Proposing a reusable organization

• The Conceptual Ontology

– It provides a general framework for representing application communication tasks

– It includes a syntactic-semantic taxonomy of attributes

• Capturing the relations between application communication tasks and their linguistic realization

Conclusions

Proposing a reusable organization

• The Linguistic Ontology

– It is an adaptation of NIGEL grammar for communication with KBSs in Spanish

• The Control Rules

– They control the process of adapting linguistic knowledge to each application

– A basic set of rules controls this process for different types of applications

Conclusions

Improving the NL processing

Using grammars and lexicon restricted to the application communication tasks

• Their size is not large: The parsing is simple

– Dynamic categories are used

– A menu-system is integrated in the NLI

• They incorporate information from the

Conceptual Ontology: The interpretation is simple

• In the lexical entries

• In the features augmenting the categories

• In the preconditions associated with the rules

Conclusions

Improving communication and user satisfaction

• Using an easy and clear language

– Guiding the user about application specific information

• Using a menu-system to introduce NL

– The user is guided about the system requirements

– The user can avoid typing sentences

• Tools helping the user are incorporated into the interface

GIWEB

Interface

Parser

Grammar

Lexicon

Dialogue

Controller

Wrapper

1

Wrapper

2

Conceptual

Ontology

Wrapper n

Internet

Source

1

Source

2

Source n

User

Download