Abstract
Research in chatbots is already more than fifty years old, starting with the famous Eliza example. Although current chatbots might perform better, overall, than Eliza the basic principles used have not evolved that much. Recent advances are made through the use of massive learning on huge amounts of resources available through Internet dialogues. However, in most domains these huge corpora are not available. Another limitation is that most research is done on chatbots that are used for focused task driven dialogues. This context gives a natural focus for the dialogue and facilitates the use of simple reactive rules or frame-based approaches. In this paper, we argue that if chatbots are used in more general domains we have to make use of different types of knowledge to successfully guide the chatbot through the dialogue. We propose the use of argumentation theory and social practices as two general applicable sources of knowledge to guide conversations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Drools is a tool to describe expert system rules. See www.drools.org for documentation and software.
References
Augello, A., Gentile, M., Dignum, F.: Social practices for social driven conversations in serious games. In: de De Gloria, A., Veltkamp, R. (eds.) GALA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9599, pp. 100–110. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40216-1_11
Augello, A., Gentile, M., Weideveld, L., Dignum, F.: A model of a social chatbot. In: De Pietro, G., Gallo, L., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) Intelligent Interactive Multimedia Systems and Services 2016. SIST, vol. 55, pp. 637–647. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39345-2_57
Bex, F., Modgil, S., Prakken, H., Reed, C.: On logical specifications of the argument interchange format. J. Logic Comput. 23(5), 951–989 (2013)
Bex, F., Peters, J., Testerink, B.: A.I. for online criminal complaints: from natural dialogues to structured scenarios. In: A.I. for Justice workshop (ECAI 2016) (2016)
Bex, F., Reed, C.: Dialogue templates for automatic argument processing. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2012, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 245, pp. 366–377 (2012)
Chesñevar, C., Modgil, S., Rahwan, I., Reed, C., Simari, G., South, M., Vreeswijk, G., Willmott, S.: Towards an argument interchange format. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 21(04), 293–316 (2006)
Clark, H.H.: Using Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)
Dignum, V.: A model for organizational interaction: based on agents, founded in logic. SIKS Dissertation Series 2004–1. Utrecht University, Ph.D. thesis (2004)
Gordon, T.F., Prakken, H., Walton, D.: The carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artif. Intell. 171(10), 875–896 (2007)
Holtz, G.: JASSS. Generating social practices 17(1), 17 (2014)
Jeuring, J., et al.: Communicate!—a serious game for communication skills—. In: Conole, G., Klobučar, T., Rensing, C., Konert, J., Lavoué, É. (eds.) EC-TEL 2015. LNCS, vol. 9307, pp. 513–517. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_49
Marietto, M.D.G.B., de Aguiar, R.V., Barbosa, G.D.O., Botelho, W.T., Pimentel, E., Frana, R.D.S., da Silva, V.L.: Artificial intelligence markup language: a brief tutorial. arXiv preprint (2013). arXiv:1307.3091
McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: Dialogue games for agent argumentation. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 261–280. Springer, Boston (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_13
Ortony, A., Clore, G.L., Collins, A.: The Cognitive Structure of Emotions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1988)
Prakken, H.: Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. J. Logic Comput. 15(6), 1009–1040 (2005)
Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument Comput. 1(2), 93–124 (2010)
Reckwitz, A.: Toward a theory of social practices. Eur. J. Soc. Theory 5(2), 243–263 (2002)
Shove, E., Pantzar, M., Watson, M.: The Dynamics of Social Practice. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2012)
Snaith, M., Reed, C.: TOAST: online ASPIC\({}^{\text{+}}\) implementation. In: Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2012, Vienna, Austria, 10–12 September 2012, pp. 509–510 (2012)
van der Weide, T.: Arguing to motivate decisions. Utrecht University, Ph.D. thesis (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dignum, F., Bex, F. (2018). Creating Dialogues Using Argumentation and Social Practices. In: Diplaris, S., Satsiou, A., Følstad, A., Vafopoulos, M., Vilarinho, T. (eds) Internet Science. INSCI 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10750. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77547-0_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77547-0_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-77546-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-77547-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)