Abstract
In this paper we introduce a formal model of dialogue based on grammar systems theory: Conversational Grammar Systems (CGS). The model takes into account ideas from the study of human-human dialogue in order to define a flexible mechanism for coherent dialogues that may help in the design of effective and user-friendly computer dialogue systems. The main feature of the model is to present an action view of dialogue. CGS model dialogue as an inter-action, this is a sequence of acts performed by two or more agents in a common environment. We claim that CGS are able to model dialogue with a high degree of flexibility, which means that they are able to accept new concepts and modify rules, protocols and settings during the computation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahrenberg, L., Jönsson, A., & Dahlbäck, N. (1990). Discourse representation and discourse management for a natural language dialogue system. In Proceedings of the second nordic conference on text comprehension in man and machine. Taby, Stockholm.
Ahrenberg, L., Dahlbäck, N., & Jönsson, A. (1995). Coding schemes for studies of natural language dialogue. In Working notes from AAAI spring symposium.
Allen, J., Byron, D., Dzikovska, M., Ferguson, G., Galescu, L., & Stent, A. (2000). An architecture for a generic dialogue shell. Natural Language Engineering, 6(3), 1–16.
Allwood, J. (1976). Linguistic communication as action and cooperation. Gothenburg monographs in linguistics 2. Göteborg University.
Allwood, J. (1994). Obligations and options in dialogue. Think, 3, 9–18.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Bel-Enguix, G., Grando, A., & Jiménez-López, M. D. (2006). A grammatical framework for modelling multi-agent dialogues. In Z. Shi & R. Sadananda (Eds.), LNCS : Vol. 4088. Agent computing and multi-agent systems (pp. 10–21). 9th Pacific Rim international workshop on multi-agents, PRIMA 2006. Berlin: Springer.
Bel-Enguix, G., Grando, A., & Jiménez-López, M. D. (2007). An interaction protocol for agent communication. In H. D. Burkhard, G. Lindemann, R. Verbrugge, & L. Varga (Eds.), Multi-agent systems and applications V (pp. 62–72). Berlin: Springer.
Bohlin, P., Bos, J., Larsson, S., Lewin, I., Matheson, C., & Milward, D. (1999). Survey of existing interactive systems (Technical Report). TRINDI, Deliverable D1.3.
Bunt, H. C. (1990). DIT-dynamic interpretation in text and dialogue (Technical report. ITK Research Report 15). Tilburg University.
Bunt, H. C. (1994). Context and dialogue control. Think, 3, 19–30.
Bunt, H. C. (2000). Dialogue pragmatics and context specification. In H. C. Bunt & W. Black (Eds.), Abduction, belief and content in dialogue (pp. 81–150). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, P. (1998). Dialogue modelling. In R. Cole, J. Mariani, H. Uszkoreit, G. Varile, A. Zaenen, A. Zampolli, & V. Zue (Eds.), Survey of the state of the art in human language technology (Chap. 6).
Csuhaj-Varjú, E., Dassow, J., Kelemen, J., & Păun, Gh. (1994). Grammar systems: a grammatical approach to distribution and cooperation. London: Gordon and Breach.
Dahlbäck, N., & Jönsson, J. (1992). An empirically based computationally tractable dialogue model. In Proceedings of the fourteenth annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 785–790).
Dediu, A., & Grando, A. (2005a). Eco-grammar systems as models for parallel evolutionary algorithms. In O. B. Lupanov, O. M. Kasim-Zade, A. V. Chaskin, & K. Steinhöfel (Eds.), Stochastic algorithms: foundations and applications (pp. 228–238). Third international symposium, SAGA 2005, Moscow. Berlin: Springer.
Dediu, A., & Grando, A. (2005b). Simulating evolutionary algorithms with eco-grammar systems. In J. Mira & J. R. Álvarez (Eds.), Artificial intelligence and knowledge engineering applications, a bioinspired approach. Berlin: Springer.
Jokinen, K. (2003). Natural interaction in spoken dialogue systems. In Proceedings of the workshop on ontologies and multilinguality in user interfaces (Vol. 4, pp. 730–734). HCI International 2003, Greece.
Kerminen, A., & Jokinen, K. (2003). Distributed dialogue management in a blackboard architecture. In Proceedings of the EACL workshop dialogue systems: interaction, adaptation and styles of management (pp. 55–66). Budapest.
Korta, K., & Larrazabal, J. (1993). Dialogue as action. In K. Korta & J. Larrazabal (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics of natural language: logical and computational aspects (pp. 7–23). San Sebastián.
Larsson, S. (2002). Issue-based dialogue management. Ph.D. thesis, Göteborg University, Sweden.
Larsson, S., & Traum, D. (2000). Information state and dialogue management in the trindi dialogue move engine toolkit. Natural Language Engineering, 6, 323–340.
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Luff, P., Gilbert, N., & Frohlich, D. (1990). Computers and conversation. London: Academic Press.
Norman, M., & Thomas, P. (1990). The very idea. Informing HCI design from conversation analysis. In P. Luff, N. Gilbert, & D. Frohlich (Eds.), Computers and conversation (pp. 51–65). London: Academic Press.
Ogden, W. C., & Bernick, Ph. (1997). Using natural language interfaces. In M. G. Helander, T. K. Landauer, & P. V. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 137–161). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Păun, Gh. (Ed.) (1995). Artificial life: grammatical models. Bucharest: Black Sea University Press.
Reichman, R. (1985). Getting computers to talk like you and me. Discourse context, focus, and semantics (an ATN model). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Robinson, H. (1990). Towards a sociology of human-computer interaction. A software engineer’s perspective. In P. Luff, N. Gilbert, & D. Frohlich (Eds.), Computers and conversation (pp. 39–49). London: Academic Press.
Rozenberg, G., & Salomaa, A. (1997). Handbook of formal languages. Berlin: Springer.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sharrock, W., & Anderson, B. (1987). Epilogue: the definition of alternatives: some sources of confusion in interdisciplinary discussion. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 290–321). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.
Traum, D. R. (1999). Speech acts for dialogue agents. In M. Wooldride & A. Rao (Eds.), Foundations of rational agency (pp. 169–201). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Traum, D. R. (2001). Ideas on multi-layer dialogue management for multi-party, multi-conversation, multi-modal communication. In M. Theune, A. Nijholt, & H. Hondrop (Eds.), Computational linguistics in the Netherlands, 2001.
Xu, W., Xu, B., Huang, T., & Xia, H. (2002). Bridging the gap between dialogue management and dialogue models. In Proceedings of the third SIGdial workshop on discourse and dialogue. Association for computational linguistics (pp. 201–210).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bel-Enguix, G., Jiménez-López, M.D. Modelling dialogue as inter-action. Int J Speech Technol 11, 209 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10772-009-9052-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10772-009-9052-6