Skip to main content

Abstract

Explanation is an interactive process, requiring a dialogue between advice-giver and advice-seeker. Yet current expert systems cannot participate in a dialogue with users. In particular these systems cannot clarify misunderstood explanations, elaborate on previous explanations, or respond to follow-up questions in the context of the on-going dialogue. In this paper, we describe a reactive approach to explanation — one that can participate in an on-going dialogue and employs feedback from the user to guide subsequent explanations. Our system plans explanations from a rich set of explanation strategies, recording the system’s discourse goals, the plans used to achieve them, and any assumptions made while planning a response. This record provides the dialogue context the system needs to respond appropriately to the user’s feedback. We illustrate our approach with examples of disambiguating a follow-up question and producing a clarifying elaboration in response to a misunderstood explanation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Appelt, Douglas E. 1985. Planning English Sentences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Buchanan and Shortliffe, 1984) Buchanan, Bruce G. and Shortliffe, Edward H. 1984. Rule-Based Expert Systems: The MYCIN Experiments of Me Stanford Heuristic Programming Project. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Carberry, Sandra 1983. Tracking user goals in an information-seeking environment. In Proceedings of the Third National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Washington, D.C. 59–63.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Clancey, William J. and Letsinger, Reed 1981. NEOMYCIN: Reconfiguring a rule-based expert system for application to teaching. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, B. C., Canada. 829–836.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Clancey, 1983) Clancey, William J. 1983. The epistemology of a rule-based expert system: a framework for explanation. Artificial Intelligence 20(3):215251.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cohen, Philip R. and Perrault, C. Raymond 1979. Elements of a plan-based theory of speech acts. Cognitive Science 3: 177–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Davis, Randall 1976. Applications of Meta-level Knowledge to the Construction, Maintenance, and Use of Large Knowledge Bases. Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Smedt and Kempen, 1987) De Smedt, Koenraad and Kempen, Gerard 1987. Incremental sentence production, self-correction and coordination. In Natural Language Generation: New Results in Artificial Intelligence. Marti-nus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  9. De Smedt and Kempen, 1990) De Smedt, Koenraad and Kempen, Gerard 1987. Segment Grammar: a Formalism for Incremental Sentence Generation In Natural Language Generation in Artificial Intelligence and Computational Linguistics,(this volume). Paris, Swartout, Mann (Eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grosz, Barbara J. and Sidner, Candace L. 1986. Attention, intention, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics 12 (3): 175–204.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hovy, 1988a) Hovy, Eduard H. 1988a. Planning coherent multisentential text. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics State University of New York, Buffalo, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hovy, 1988b) Hovy, Eduard H. 1988b. Two types of planning in language generation. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics State University of New York, Buffalo, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hovy, Eduard H. 1990. Approaches to the planning of coherent text. In Natural Language Generation in Artificial Intelligence and Computational Linguistics, (this volume). Paris, Swartout, Mann (Eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kasper, Robert 1989. SPL: A sentence plan language for text generation. Technical Report forthcoming, USC/Information Sciences Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kass, Robert and Finin, Tim 1988. Modeling the user in natural language systems. Computational Linguistics 14 (3): 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kendon, Adam 1967. Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica 26: 22–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Litman, Diane 1985. Plan Recognition and Discourse Analysis: An Integrated Approach for Understanding Dialogues. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Rochester. Published by University of Rochester as Technical Report TR 170.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mann, William C. and Matthiessen, Christian 1983. Nigel: A systemic grammar for text generation. Technical Report RR-83–105, USC/Information Sciences Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mann and Thompson, 1987) Mann, William C. and Thompson, Sandra A. 1987. Rhetorical Structure Theory: A theory of text organization. In Polanyi, Livia, editor 1987, The Structure of Discourse. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, N.J. Also available as USC/Information Sciences Institute Technical Report Number RS-87–190.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 1984. Systemic grammar in computation: the Nigel case. Technical Report RR-83–121, USC/Information Sciences Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  21. McCoy, 1989) McCoy, Kathleen F. 1989. Generating context sensitive responses to object-related misconceptions. Artificial Intelligence 41(2):157195.

    Google Scholar 

  22. McKeown, Kathleen R.; Wish, Myron; and Matthews, Kevin 1985. Tailoring explanations for the user. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles, CA. 794–798.

    Google Scholar 

  23. McKeown, Kathleen R. 1985. Text Generation: Using Discourse Strategies and Focus Constraints to Generate Natural Language Text. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Moore and Paris, 1988) Moore, Johanna D. and Paris, Cécile L. 1988. Constructing coherent text using rhetorical relations. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society,Montreal, Quebec.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Moore and Paris, 1989) Moore, Johanna D. and Paris, Cécile L. 1989. Planning text for advisory dialogues. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics,Vancouver, B.C., Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Moore and Swartout, 1990) Moore, Johanna D. and Swartout, William R. 1990. Pointing: A way toward explanation dialogue. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Moore, Johanna D. 1989. A Reactive Approach to Explanation in Expert and Advice-Giving Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Neches, Robert, Swartout, William R. and Moore, Johanna D. 1985. Enhanced maintenance and explanation of expert systems through explicit models of their development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-11(11).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Paris, Cécile L. 1988. Tailoring object descriptions to the user’s level of expertise. Computational Linguistics 14 (3): 64–78.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Paris, Cécile L. 1990. Generation and explanation: Building an explanation facility for the explainable expert systems framework. In Natural Language Generation in Artificial Intelligence and Computational Linguistics, (this volume). Paris, Swartout, Mann (Eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pollack, 1982) Pollack, Martha E., Hirschberg, Julia and Webber, Bonnie Lynn 1982. User participation in the reasoning processes of expert systems. Technical Report CIS-82–10, University of Pennsylvania. A short version of this report appears in the Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ringle, Martin H. and Bruce, Bertram C. 1981. Conversation failure. In Lehnert, Wendy G. and Ringle, Martin H., editors 1981, Knowledge Representation and Natural Language Processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey. 203–221.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sacerdoti, Earl D. 1975. A structure for plans and behavior. Technical Report TN-109, SRI.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sidner, Candace L. 1979. Toward a Computational Theory of Definite Anaphora Comprehension in English Discourse. Ph.D. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sparck Jones, Karen 1984. User models and expert systems. Technical Report No. 61, University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Swartout, William R. and Smoliar, Stephen W. 1987. On making expert systems more like experts. Expert Systems 4 (3).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Swartout, William R. 1981. Explaining and justifying expert consulting programs. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, B. C., Canada. 815–823.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Swartout, 1983) Swartout, William R. 1983. XPLAIN: A system for creating and explaining expert consulting systems. Artificial Intelligence 21(3):285325. Also available as ISI/RS-83–4.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Moore, J.D., Swartout, W.R. (1991). A Reactive Approach to Explanation: Taking the User’s Feedback into Account. In: Paris, C.L., Swartout, W.R., Mann, W.C. (eds) Natural Language Generation in Artificial Intelligence and Computational Linguistics. The Kluwer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science, vol 119. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5945-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5945-7_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5125-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-5945-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics