skip to main content
10.1145/3209978.3210160acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Toward Voice Query Clarification

Published:27 June 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Query suggestions are a standard means to clarify the intent of underspecified queries. In a voice-based search setting, the compilation of query suggestions is not straightforward, and user-centric research targeting query underspecification is lacking so far. Our paper analyses a specific type of ambiguous voice queries and studies the impact of various kinds of voice query clarifications offered by the system and its impact on user satisfaction. We conduct a user study that measures the satisfaction for clarifications that are explicitly invoked and presented by seven different methods. Our findings include that (1) user experience depends on language proficiency levels, (2) users are not dissatisfied when prompted for clarifications (in fact, enjoy it sometimes), and (3) the most effective way of query clarification depends on the number and lengths of the possible answers.

References

  1. James Allan, W. Bruce Croft, Alistair Moffat, and Mark Sanderson . 2012. Frontiers, challenges, and opportunities for information retrieval: Report from SWIRL 2012. SIGIR Forum, Vol. 46, 1 (2012), 2--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Sumit Bhatia, Debapriyo Majumdar, and Prasenjit Mitra . 2011. Query suggestions in the absence of query logs. In SIGIR. ACM, 795--804. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Pavel Braslavski, Denis Savenkov, Eugene Agichtein, and Alina Dubatovka . 2017. What Do You Mean Exactly?. In CHIIR. ACM, 345--348. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Jennifer Lai and Nicole Yankelovich . 2006. Speech Interface Design. Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, bibfieldeditorKeith Brown (Ed.). Elsevier, Oxford, 764--770.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ewa Luger and Abigail Sellen . 2016. "Like Having a Really Bad PA": The Gulf between User Expectation and Experience of Conversational Agents. In CHI. ACM, 5286--5297. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Filip Radlinski and Nick Craswell . 2017. A Theoretical Framework for Conversational Search. CHIIR. ACM, 117--126. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Fabrizio Silvestri . 2010. Mining Query Logs: Turning Search Usage Data into Knowledge. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, Vol. 4, 1--2 (2010), 1--174. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Johanne R. Trippas, Damiano Spina, Lawrence Cavedon, Hideo Joho, and Mark Sanderson . 2018. Informing the Design of Spoken Conversational Search: Perspective Paper CHIIR. ACM, 32--41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Johanne R. Trippas, Damiano Spina, Lawrence Cavedon, and Mark Sanderson . 2017. How Do People Interact in Conversational Speech-Only Search Tasks: A Preliminary Analysis. In CHIIR. ACM, 325--328. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Alexandra Vtyurina, Denis Savenkov, Eugene Agichtein, and Charles L. A. Clarke . 2017. Exploring Conversational Search With Humans, Assistants, and Wizards CHI Extended Abstracts. ACM, 2187--2193. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Toward Voice Query Clarification

      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
        SIGIR '18: The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval
        June 2018
        1509 pages
        ISBN:9781450356572
        DOI:10.1145/3209978

        Copyright © 2018 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: 27 June 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper

        Acceptance Rates

        SIGIR '18 Paper Acceptance Rate86of409submissions,21%Overall Acceptance Rate792of3,983submissions,20%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader