Cover not available
Part of
Dialogue across Media
Edited by Jarmila Mildorf and Bronwen Thomas
[Dialogue Studies 28] 2017
► pp. 179–202

Dialogue with computers

Dialogue games in action

With the advent of digital personal assistants for mobile devices, systems that are marketed as engaging in (spoken) dialogue have reached a wider public than ever before. For a student of dialogue, this raises the question to what extent such systems are genuine dialogue partners. In order to address this question, this study proposes to use the concept of a dialogue game as an analytical tool. Thus, we reframe the question as asking for the dialogue games that such systems play. Our analysis, as applied to a number of landmark systems and illustrated with dialogue extracts, leads to a fine-grained classification of such systems. Drawing on this analysis, we propose that the uptake of future generations of more powerful dialogue systems will depend on whether they are self-validating. A self-validating dialogue system can not only talk and do things, but also discuss the why of what it says and does, and learn from such discussions.
Published online: 19 January 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.28.10piw
References (31)
References
Ahn, René, Robbert-Jan Beun, Tijn Borghuis, Harry Bunt, and Cees van Overveld. 1995. “The DenK-architecture: A Fundamental Approach to User-interfaces.” Artificial Intelligence Review 8 (3): 431-445. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aust, Harald, Martin Oerder, Frank Seide, and Volker Steinbiss. 1995. “The Philips Automatic Train Timetable Information System.” Speech Communication 17: 249–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beun, Robbert-Jan. 2001. “On the Generation of Coherent Dialogue: A Computational Approach.” Pragmatics and Cognition 9 (1): 37-68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobrow, Daniel G., Ronald M. Kaplan, Martin Kay, Donald A. Norman, Henry Thompson, and Terry Winograd. 1977. “GUS, A Frame-Driven Dialog System.” Artificial Intelligence 8: 155-173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bos, Johan, Ewan Klein, Oliver Lemon, and Tetsushi Oka. 2003. “DIPPER: Description and Formalisation of an Information-State Update Dialogue System Architecture”. In 4th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue , 115-124. Sapporo, Japan.
Brandom, Robert. 1994. Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bunt, Harry C., and Ab F.V. Van Katwijk. 1979. “Dialogue Acts as Elements of a Language Game.” In Linguistics in the Netherlands 1977-1979, ed. by Wim Zonneveld and Fred Weerman, 264-282. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 2012. The Interactive Stance: Meaning for Conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamblin, Charles L. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Gregoromichelaki, Eleni, Ruth Kempson, Matthew Purver, Gregory J. Mills, Ronnie Cann, Wilfried Meyer-Viol, and Patrick G.T. Healey. 2011. “Incrementality and Intention-Recognition in Utterance Processing.” Dialogue and Discourse 2 (1): 199–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempson, Ruth, Wilfried Meyer-Viol, and Dov Gabbay. 2001. Dynamic Syntax: The Flow of Language Understanding. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kuyten, Patrick, Timothy Bickmore, Svetlana Stoyanchev, Paul Piwek, Helmut Prendinger, and Mitsura Ishizuka. 2012. “Fully Automated Generation of Question-Answer Pairs for Scripted Virtual Instruction.” In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents , 12-14 September 2012, Santa Cruz, CA, USA. DOI logo
Larsson, Staffan, and David Traum. 2003. “The Information State Approach to Dialogue Management.” In Current and New Directions in Discourse and Dialogue, ed. by Ronnie Smith and Jan Kuppevelt, 325-353. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lemon, Oliver, and Olivier Pietquin (eds). 2012. Data-Driven Methods for Adaptive Spoken Dialogue Systems: Computational Learning for Conversational Interfaces. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leuski, Anton, and David Traum. 2008. “A Statistical Approach for Text Processing in Virtual Humans.” In Proceedings of the 26th Army Science Conference , Orlando, Florida, USA, December 2008.
OED Online. June 2015. “dialogue | dialog, n.” Oxford University Press. [URL] & (accessed June 29, 2015).
Piwek, Paul. 1998. Logic, Information and Conversation. PhD Thesis, Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.Google Scholar
Piwek, Paul, and Svetlana Stoyanchev. 2010. “Generating Expository Dialogue from Monologue: Motivation, Corpus and Preliminary Rules.” In 11th Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL) , Los Angeles, USA, 333-336.
Piwek, Paul. 2011. “Three Principles of Information Flow: Conversation as a Dialogue Game.” In Perspectives on Information, ed. by Magnus Ramage and David Chapman, 106-120. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Towards a Computational Account of Inferentialist Meaning.” In Proceedings of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour (AISB50) , London.
Power, Richard. 1979. “The Organisation of Purposeful Dialogues.” Linguistics 17: 107–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plüss, Brian, Paul Piwek, and Richard Power. 2011. “Modelling Non-Cooperative Dialogue: The Role of Conversational Games.” In Proceedings of the 15th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue , 212–213, Los Angeles, California, 21–23 September 2011.
Plüss, Brian. 2014. A Computational Model of Non-Cooperation in Natural Language Dialogue. PhD thesis, The Open University, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Reeves, Byron, and Clifford Nass. 1996. The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stenius, Erik. 1967. “Mood and Language Game.” Synthese 17 (1): 254-274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tintarev, Nava, Roman Kutlak, Nir Oren, Kees van Deemter, Matt J.Green, Judith Masthoff, and Wamberto Vasconcelos. 2013. “SAsSy – Scrutable Autonomous Systems.” In Proceedings of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour (AISB) , Exeter.
Turing, Alan. 1950. “Computing Machinery and Intelligence.” Mind, LIX vol. 2236: 433–460. (Citation from The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence, 1990. ed. by Margaret A. Boden. Oxford: Oxford University Press.) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Twain, Mark. 1919. What is Man? London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
Walker, Marilyn, Diane Litman, Candace Kamm, and Alicia Abella. 1997. “PARADISE: A Framework for Evaluating Spoken Dialogue Agents.” In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics (ACL 97) , Madrid, Spain.
Weizenbaum, Joseph. 1966. “Eliza – A Computer Program for the Study of Natural Language Communication Between Man and Machine.” Communications of the ACM 9 (1): 36-45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1994 [1958]. The Blue and Brown Books: Preliminary Studies for the ‘Philosophical Investigations, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Kerzel, Matthias, Theresa Pekarek-Rosin, Erik Strahl, Stefan Heinrich & Stefan Wermter
2020. Teaching NICO How to Grasp: An Empirical Study on Crossmodal Social Interaction as a Key Factor for Robots Learning From Humans. Frontiers in Neurorobotics 14 DOI logo
Bibauw, Serge, Thomas François & Piet Desmet
2019. Discussing with a computer to practice a foreign language: research synthesis and conceptual framework of dialogue-based CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning 32:8 ► pp. 827 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.