This study investigates how discourse segmentation and turn-taking interact. Mapping syntactic, prosodic and pragmatic units, five types of conversational discourse units (CDU) were identified. Based on this segmentation, associations were examined between the syntactic, prosodic and pragmatic boundaries and turn-taking, as well as the transition speed after each type of CDU. Results show: 1) The relationships between the three linguistic boundaries and the occurrence of turn-taking were significant, and the association was the strongest for the pragmatic boundaries; it was weaker for prosodic boundaries and the weakest for the syntactic boundaries. 2) The type of CDU influenced the transition speed, with the pragmatic-syntax-bound CDU being fastest. The study highlights the importance of meaning-connection and earlier emergence of the utterance gist in timing turn-taking.
{"title":"The Conversational Discourse Unit: Identification and Its Role in Conversational Turn-taking Management","authors":"Junfei Hu, Liesbeth Degand","doi":"10.5210/dad.2023.203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2023.203","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates how discourse segmentation and turn-taking interact. Mapping syntactic, prosodic and pragmatic units, five types of conversational discourse units (CDU) were identified. Based on this segmentation, associations were examined between the syntactic, prosodic and pragmatic boundaries and turn-taking, as well as the transition speed after each type of CDU. Results show: 1) The relationships between the three linguistic boundaries and the occurrence of turn-taking were significant, and the association was the strongest for the pragmatic boundaries; it was weaker for prosodic boundaries and the weakest for the syntactic boundaries. 2) The type of CDU influenced the transition speed, with the pragmatic-syntax-bound CDU being fastest. The study highlights the importance of meaning-connection and earlier emergence of the utterance gist in timing turn-taking.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"36 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135773452","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Coherence relations between elements of discourse can be signaled by linguistic devices such as connectives and/or alternative signals. While the use and comprehension of connectives have been studied in different categories of speakers, less is known about the functioning of alternative signals of coherence relations, especially in younger populations. In the current study, we aim to examine the sensitivity of French-speaking teenagers to the alternative signals of list relation (words such as plusieurs ‘several’ and différents ‘various’), combined with connectives varying in frequency and signaling two types of coherence relations (addition: en plus, en outre; consequence: donc, ainsi). Our results reveal that, as early as in teenage years, speakers are sensitive (i.e., they produce list continuation sentences) to alternative signals of list relation. Furthermore, the inference of list relation is not significantly changed when an alternative signal is combined with the more frequent additive connective en plus. However, this inference is inhibited by the less frequent additive connective en outre, and is almost completely hindered by the consequence connectives donc and ainsi. Overall, these results show that alternative list signals are an important source for the inference of the list relation, even in the presence of more salient signals of coherence such as connectives.
& # x0D;语篇要素之间的连贯关系可以通过连接词和/或替代信号等语言手段来表示。虽然在不同类别的说话者中对连接词的使用和理解进行了研究，但对连贯关系的替代信号的功能知之甚少，特别是在年轻人群中。在当前的研究中，我们的目的是研究法语青少年对列表关系的替代信号的敏感性(如plusiieurs的“几个”和diffents的“各种”)，结合频率不同的连接词和信号两种类型的连贯关系(加法:en plus, en outre;结果:donc, ainsi)。我们的研究结果表明，早在青少年时期，说话者就对列表关系的替代信号很敏感(即他们会产生列表接续句)。此外，当一个替代信号与频率更高的附加连词en +组合时，列表关系的推理没有明显改变。然而，这种推断被较不频繁的附加连接词en outre所抑制，并且几乎完全被结果连接词donc和ainsi所阻碍。总的来说，这些结果表明，即使存在更显著的连贯信号(如连接词)，替代列表信号也是列表关系推理的重要来源。
{"title":"Exploring the Sensitivity to Alternative Signals of Coherence Relations","authors":"Ekaterina Tskhovrebova, Sandrine Zufferey, Pascal Gygax","doi":"10.5210/dad.2023.202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2023.202","url":null,"abstract":"
 Coherence relations between elements of discourse can be signaled by linguistic devices such as connectives and/or alternative signals. While the use and comprehension of connectives have been studied in different categories of speakers, less is known about the functioning of alternative signals of coherence relations, especially in younger populations. In the current study, we aim to examine the sensitivity of French-speaking teenagers to the alternative signals of list relation (words such as plusieurs ‘several’ and différents ‘various’), combined with connectives varying in frequency and signaling two types of coherence relations (addition: en plus, en outre; consequence: donc, ainsi). Our results reveal that, as early as in teenage years, speakers are sensitive (i.e., they produce list continuation sentences) to alternative signals of list relation. Furthermore, the inference of list relation is not significantly changed when an alternative signal is combined with the more frequent additive connective en plus. However, this inference is inhibited by the less frequent additive connective en outre, and is almost completely hindered by the consequence connectives donc and ainsi. Overall, these results show that alternative list signals are an important source for the inference of the list relation, even in the presence of more salient signals of coherence such as connectives.
","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"111 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135645883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Anaphoric reference is an aspect of language interpretation covering a variety of types of interpretation beyond the simple case of identity reference to entities introduced via nominal expressions covered by the traditional coreference task in its most recent incarnation in ONTONOTES and similar datasets. One of these cases that go beyond simple coreference is anaphoric reference to entities that must be added to the discourse model via accommodation, and in particular split-antecedent references to entities constructed out of other entities, as in split-antecedent plurals and in some cases of discourse deixis. Although this type of anaphoric reference is now annotated in many datasets, systems interpreting such references cannot be evaluated using the Reference coreference scorer Pradhan et al. (2014). As part of the work towards a new scorer for anaphoric reference able to evaluate all aspects of anaphoric interpretation in the coverage of the Universal Anaphora initiative, we propose in this paper a solution to the technical problem of generalizing existing metrics for identity anaphora so that they can also be used to score cases of split-antecedents. This is the first such proposal in the literature on anaphora or coreference, and has been successfully used to score both split-antecedent plural references and discourse deixis in the recent CODI/CRAC anaphora resolution in dialogue shared tasks.
{"title":"Scoring Coreference Chains with Split-Antecedent Anaphors","authors":"Silviu Paun, Juntao Yu, Nafise Sadat Moosavi, Massimo Poesio","doi":"10.5210/dad.2023.201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2023.201","url":null,"abstract":"Anaphoric reference is an aspect of language interpretation covering a variety of types of interpretation beyond the simple case of identity reference to entities introduced via nominal expressions covered by the traditional coreference task in its most recent incarnation in ONTONOTES and similar datasets. One of these cases that go beyond simple coreference is anaphoric reference to entities that must be added to the discourse model via accommodation, and in particular split-antecedent references to entities constructed out of other entities, as in split-antecedent plurals and in some cases of discourse deixis. Although this type of anaphoric reference is now annotated in many datasets, systems interpreting such references cannot be evaluated using the Reference coreference scorer Pradhan et al. (2014). As part of the work towards a new scorer for anaphoric reference able to evaluate all aspects of anaphoric interpretation in the coverage of the Universal Anaphora initiative, we propose in this paper a solution to the technical problem of generalizing existing metrics for identity anaphora so that they can also be used to score cases of split-antecedents. This is the first such proposal in the literature on anaphora or coreference, and has been successfully used to score both split-antecedent plural references and discourse deixis in the recent CODI/CRAC anaphora resolution in dialogue shared tasks.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"239 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135425394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Connectives convey discourse functions that provide textual and pragmatic information in speech communication on top of canonical, sentential use. This paper proposes an applicable scheme with illustrative examples for distinguishing Sentential, Conclusion, Disfluency, Elaboration, and Resumption uses of Mandarin connectives, including conjunctions and adverbs. Quantitative results of our annotation works are presented to gain an overview of connectives in a Mandarin conversational speech corpus. A fine-grained taxonomy is also discussed, but it requires more empirical data to approve the applicability. By conducting a multinomial logistic regression model, we illustrate that connectives exhibit consistent patterns in positional, phonetic, and contextual features oriented to the associated discourse functions. Our results confirm that the position of Conclusion and Resumption connectives orient more to positions in semantically, rather than prosodically, determined units. We also found that connectives used for all four discourse functions tend to have a higher initial F0 value than those of sentential use. Resumption and Disfluency uses are expected to have the largest increase in initial F0 value, followed by Conclusion and Elaboration uses. Durational cues of the preceding context enable distinguishing Sentential use from discourse uses of Conclusion, Elaboration, and Resumption of connectives.
{"title":"Form and Function of Connectives in Chinese Conversational Speech","authors":"Nien-Heng Wu, S. Tseng","doi":"10.5210/dad.2023.104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2023.104","url":null,"abstract":"Connectives convey discourse functions that provide textual and pragmatic information in speech communication on top of canonical, sentential use. This paper proposes an applicable scheme with illustrative examples for distinguishing Sentential, Conclusion, Disfluency, Elaboration, and Resumption uses of Mandarin connectives, including conjunctions and adverbs. Quantitative results of our annotation works are presented to gain an overview of connectives in a Mandarin conversational speech corpus. A fine-grained taxonomy is also discussed, but it requires more empirical data to approve the applicability. By conducting a multinomial logistic regression model, we illustrate that connectives exhibit consistent patterns in positional, phonetic, and contextual features oriented to the associated discourse functions. Our results confirm that the position of Conclusion and Resumption connectives orient more to positions in semantically, rather than prosodically, determined units. We also found that connectives used for all four discourse functions tend to have a higher initial F0 value than those of sentential use. Resumption and Disfluency uses are expected to have the largest increase in initial F0 value, followed by Conclusion and Elaboration uses. Durational cues of the preceding context enable distinguishing Sentential use from discourse uses of Conclusion, Elaboration, and Resumption of connectives.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"43 1","pages":"88-124"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84049974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Fact checking and fake news detection has garnered increasing interest within the natural language processing (NLP) community in recent years, yet other aspects of misinformation remain unexplored. One such phenomenon is `bullshit', which different disciplines have tried to define since it first entered academic discussion nearly four decades ago. Fact checking bullshitters is useless, because factual reality typically plays no part in their assertions: Where liars deceive about content, bullshitters deceive about their goals. Bullshitting is misleading about language itself, which necessitates identifying the points at which pragmatic conventions are broken with deceptive intent. This paper aims to introduce bullshitology into the field of NLP by tying it to questions in a QUD-based definition, providing two approaches to bullshit annotation, and finally outlining which combinations of NLP methods will be helpful to classify which kinds of linguistic bullshit.
{"title":"Bullshit, Pragmatic Deception, and Natural Language Processing","authors":"Oliver Deck","doi":"10.5210/dad.2023.103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2023.103","url":null,"abstract":"Fact checking and fake news detection has garnered increasing interest within the natural language processing (NLP) community in recent years, yet other aspects of misinformation remain unexplored. One such phenomenon is `bullshit', which different disciplines have tried to define since it first entered academic discussion nearly four decades ago. Fact checking bullshitters is useless, because factual reality typically plays no part in their assertions: Where liars deceive about content, bullshitters deceive about their goals. Bullshitting is misleading about language itself, which necessitates identifying the points at which pragmatic conventions are broken with deceptive intent. This paper aims to introduce bullshitology into the field of NLP by tying it to questions in a QUD-based definition, providing two approaches to bullshit annotation, and finally outlining which combinations of NLP methods will be helpful to classify which kinds of linguistic bullshit.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"77 1","pages":"56-87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83874927","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
I propose a discourse-level analysis of report constructions. Indirect discourse, mixed and direct quotation, free indirect discourse, and attitude ascriptions are all analyzed in terms of a discourse relation of ATTRIBUTION, connecting two propositional discourse units corresponding to (i) a frame segment (he said, she dreamed) and a (possibly complex, multi-sentence) report (“I’m an idiot”, (that) she was president). I provide a unified semantics for the discourse relation of ATTRIBUTION that invokes a flexible notion of ‘characterization’. A discourse unit may characterize a speech event by reproducing its linguistic surface form (as in quotation) or its propositional content (as in indirect speech and attitude reports), or some mixture of both (as in mixed quotation or free indirect discourse). I formalize this unified discourse-level ATTRIBUTION approach to reporting within the general framework of SDRT, and apply it to direct, indirect, and free indirect reports that extend beyond the single embedded or quoted clause. The resulting account is the first to do justice to the complex internal dependencies within stretches of reported discourse.
本文提出对报告结构进行语篇层面的分析。间接引语、混合引语和直接引语、自由间接引语和态度归因都是根据归因的话语关系来分析的，它连接了两个命题话语单元，分别对应于(i)框架段(他说，她做梦)和(可能是复杂的，多句的)报道(“我是白痴”，(that) she was president)。我为归因的话语关系提供了一个统一的语义，它调用了一个灵活的“表征”概念。话语单位可以通过再现言语事件的语言表面形式(如引语)或其命题内容(如间接引语和态度报告)，或两者的混合(如混合引语或自由间接引语)来表征言语事件。我将这种统一的话语级归因方法正式应用于SDRT总体框架内的报告，并将其应用于超出单个嵌入或引用条款的直接、间接和自由间接报告。由此产生的解释是第一个公正地对待报道话语范围内复杂的内部依赖关系的。
{"title":"Attribution and the discourse structure of reports","authors":"E. Maier","doi":"10.5210/dad.2023.102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2023.102","url":null,"abstract":"I propose a discourse-level analysis of report constructions. Indirect discourse, mixed and direct quotation, free indirect discourse, and attitude ascriptions are all analyzed in terms of a discourse relation of ATTRIBUTION, connecting two propositional discourse units corresponding to (i) a frame segment (he said, she dreamed) and a (possibly complex, multi-sentence) report (“I’m an idiot”, (that) she was president). I provide a unified semantics for the discourse relation of ATTRIBUTION that invokes a flexible notion of ‘characterization’. A discourse unit may characterize a speech event by reproducing its linguistic surface form (as in quotation) or its propositional content (as in indirect speech and attitude reports), or some mixture of both (as in mixed quotation or free indirect discourse). I formalize this unified discourse-level ATTRIBUTION approach to reporting within the general framework of SDRT, and apply it to direct, indirect, and free indirect reports that extend beyond the single embedded or quoted clause. The resulting account is the first to do justice to the complex internal dependencies within stretches of reported discourse.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"192 1","pages":"34-55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74185357","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. Ginzburg, Zulipiye Yusupujiang, Chuyuan Li, Kexin Ren, A. Kucharska, P. Lupkowski
The main aim of this paper is to provide a characterization of the response space for questions using a taxonomy grounded in a dialogical formal semantics. As a starting point we take the typology for responses in the form of questions provided in cite{lupginz-jlm}. This work develops a wide coverage taxonomy for question/question sequences observable in corpora including the BNC, CHILDES, and BEE, as well as formal modeling of all the postulated classes. Our aim is to extend this work to cover emph{all} responses to questions. We present the extended typology of responses to questions based on a corpus studies of BNC, BEE, Maptask and CornellMovie with include 506, 262, 467, and 678 question/response pairs respectively. We compare the data for English with data from Polish using the Spokes corpus (694 question/response pairs). We discuss annotation reliability and disagreement analysis. We sketch how each class can be formalized using a dialogical semantics appropriate for dialogue management.
{"title":"Characterizing the Response Space of Questions: data and theory","authors":"J. Ginzburg, Zulipiye Yusupujiang, Chuyuan Li, Kexin Ren, A. Kucharska, P. Lupkowski","doi":"10.5210/dad.2022.203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2022.203","url":null,"abstract":"The main aim of this paper is to provide a characterization of the response space for questions using a taxonomy grounded in a dialogical formal semantics. As a starting point we take the typology for responses in the form of questions provided in cite{lupginz-jlm}. This work develops a wide coverage taxonomy for question/question sequences observable in corpora including the BNC, CHILDES, and BEE, as well as formal modeling of all the postulated classes. Our aim is to extend this work to cover emph{all} responses to questions. We present the extended typology of responses to questions based on a corpus studies of BNC, BEE, Maptask and CornellMovie with include 506, 262, 467, and 678 question/response pairs respectively. We compare the data for English with data from Polish using the Spokes corpus (694 question/response pairs). We discuss annotation reliability and disagreement analysis. We sketch how each class can be formalized using a dialogical semantics appropriate for dialogue management.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"8 1","pages":"79-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81653031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marian Marchal, Merel C. J. Scholman, Vera Demberg
Readers adopt their domain knowledge to make inferences about information that is left implicit in the text. The present research investigates the role of domain knowledge in discourse relation interpretation, as this has not been examined experimentally in previous work. We compare interpretations of experts from the field of economics and biomedical sciences in texts from within and outside of their domain of expertise. The results show that high-knowledge readers are better at inferring the correct relation interpretation compared to low-knowledge readers. This effect was stronger in relations that contained a connective in the original text than in relations that were originally implicit. The study provides insight on the impact of background knowledge on discourse relation inferencing and how readers interpret discourse relations when they lack the required domain knowledge.
{"title":"The effect of domain knowledge and implicitation on discourse relation inferences","authors":"Marian Marchal, Merel C. J. Scholman, Vera Demberg","doi":"10.5210/dad.2022.202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2022.202","url":null,"abstract":"Readers adopt their domain knowledge to make inferences about information that is left implicit in the text. The present research investigates the role of domain knowledge in discourse relation interpretation, as this has not been examined experimentally in previous work. We compare interpretations of experts from the field of economics and biomedical sciences in texts from within and outside of their domain of expertise. The results show that high-knowledge readers are better at inferring the correct relation interpretation compared to low-knowledge readers. This effect was stronger in relations that contained a connective in the original text than in relations that were originally implicit. The study provides insight on the impact of background knowledge on discourse relation inferencing and how readers interpret discourse relations when they lack the required domain knowledge.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"22 1","pages":"49-78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82827025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kazunori Komatani, Kohei Ono, Ryu Takeda, Eric Nichols, Mikio Nakano
We have been addressing the problem of acquiring attributes of unknown terms through dialogues and previously proposed an approach using the implicit confirmation process. It is crucial for dialogue systems to ask questions that do not diminish the user’s willingness to talk. In this paper, we conducted a user study to investigate user impression for several question types, including explicit and implicit, to acquire lexical knowledge. We clarified the order among the types and found that repeating the same question type annoys the user and degrades user impression even when the content of the questions is correct. We also propose a method for determining whether an estimated attribute is correct, which is included in an implicit question. The method exploits multiple-user responses to implicit questions about the attribute of the same unknown term. Experimental results revealed that the proposed method exhibited a higher precision rate for determining the correctly estimated attributes than when only single-user responses were considered.
{"title":"Lexical Acquisition during Dialogues through Implicit Confirmation","authors":"Kazunori Komatani, Kohei Ono, Ryu Takeda, Eric Nichols, Mikio Nakano","doi":"10.5210/dad.2022.104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5210/dad.2022.104","url":null,"abstract":"We have been addressing the problem of acquiring attributes of unknown terms through dialogues and previously proposed an approach using the implicit confirmation process. It is crucial for dialogue systems to ask questions that do not diminish the user’s willingness to talk. In this paper, we conducted a user study to investigate user impression for several question types, including explicit and implicit, to acquire lexical knowledge. We clarified the order among the types and found that repeating the same question type annoys the user and degrades user impression even when the content of the questions is correct. We also propose a method for determining whether an estimated attribute is correct, which is included in an implicit question. The method exploits multiple-user responses to implicit questions about the attribute of the same unknown term. Experimental results revealed that the proposed method exhibited a higher precision rate for determining the correctly estimated attributes than when only single-user responses were considered.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"26 1","pages":"96-122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82980163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-24DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2205.12323
Silviu Paun, Juntao Yu, N. Moosavi, Massimo Poesio
Anaphoric reference is an aspect of language interpretation covering a variety of types of interpretation beyond the simple case of identity reference to entities introduced via nominal expressions covered by the traditional coreference task in its most recent incarnation in ONTONOTES and similar datasets. One of these cases that go beyond simple coreference is anaphoric reference to entities that must be added to the discourse model via accommodation, and in particular split-antecedent references to entities constructed out of other entities, as in split-antecedent plurals and in some cases of discourse deixis. Although this type of anaphoric reference is now annotated in many datasets, systems interpreting such references cannot be evaluated using the Reference coreference scorer Pradhan et al. (2014). As part of the work towards a new scorer for anaphoric reference able to evaluate all aspects of anaphoric interpretation in the coverage of the Universal Anaphora initiative, we propose in this paper a solution to the technical problem of generalizing existing metrics for identity anaphora so that they can also be used to score cases of split-antecedents. This is the first such proposal in the literature on anaphora or coreference, and has been successfully used to score both split-antecedent plural references and discourse deixis in the recent CODI/CRAC anaphora resolution in dialogue shared tasks.
{"title":"Scoring Coreference Chains with Split-Antecedent Anaphors","authors":"Silviu Paun, Juntao Yu, N. Moosavi, Massimo Poesio","doi":"10.48550/arXiv.2205.12323","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.12323","url":null,"abstract":"Anaphoric reference is an aspect of language interpretation covering a variety of types of interpretation beyond the simple case of identity reference to entities introduced via nominal expressions covered by the traditional coreference task in its most recent incarnation in ONTONOTES and similar datasets. One of these cases that go beyond simple coreference is anaphoric reference to entities that must be added to the discourse model via accommodation, and in particular split-antecedent references to entities constructed out of other entities, as in split-antecedent plurals and in some cases of discourse deixis. Although this type of anaphoric reference is now annotated in many datasets, systems interpreting such references cannot be evaluated using the Reference coreference scorer Pradhan et al. (2014). As part of the work towards a new scorer for anaphoric reference able to evaluate all aspects of anaphoric interpretation in the coverage of the Universal Anaphora initiative, we propose in this paper a solution to the technical problem of generalizing existing metrics for identity anaphora so that they can also be used to score cases of split-antecedents. This is the first such proposal in the literature on anaphora or coreference, and has been successfully used to score both split-antecedent plural references and discourse deixis in the recent CODI/CRAC anaphora resolution in dialogue shared tasks.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"314 1","pages":"1-48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80073629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：