Exploiting a sensed environment to improve human-agent communication

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Exploiting a sensed environment to improve human-agent communication

Full text

Pdf (274 KB)

Source

International Conference on Autonomous Agents archive
Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems table of contents

The Netherlands

SESSION: Papers: learning table of contents

Pages: 44 - 50

Year of Publication: 2005

ISBN:1-59593-093-0

Authors

Shana Watters	University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Tim Miller	University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Praveen Balachandran	University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
William Schuler	University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Richard Voyles	University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 5, Downloads (12 Months): 19, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract references index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1082473.1082481 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

This paper describes an implemented robotic agent architecture in which the environment, as sensed by the agent, is used to guide the recognition of spoken and gestural directives given by a human user. The agent recognizes these directives using a probabilistic language model that conditions probability estimates for possible directives on visually-, proprioceptively-, or otherwise-sensed properties of entities in its environment, and updates these probabilities when these properties change. The result is an agent that can discriminate against mis-recognized directives that do not 'make sense' in its representation of the current state of the world.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	Alfred V. Aho , Jeffrey D. Ullman, The Theory of Parsing, Translation, and Compiling, Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 1972
	2	Kobus Barnard , Pinar Duygulu , David Forsyth , Nando de Freitas , David M. Blei , Michael I. Jordan, Matching words and pictures, The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 3/1/2003
	3	D. Paul Benjamin , Deryle Lonsdale , Damian Lyons, Integrating Perception, Language and Problem Solving in a Cognitive Agent for a Mobile Robot, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, p.1310-1311, July 19-23, 2004, New York, New York [doi>10.1109/AAMAS.2004.150]
	4	A. W. Black. Finite state machines from feature grammars. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, pages 277--285, Pittsburgh, 1989.
	5	S. Brown-Schmidt, E. Campana, and M. K. Tanenhaus. Reference resolution in the wild: Online circumscription of referential domains in a natural interactive problem-solving task. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, pages 148--153, Fairfax, VA, Aug. 2002.
	6	J. Davenport, L. Nguyen, S. Matsoukas, R. Schwartz, and J. Makhoul. The 1998 BBN Byblos 10x real time system. In 1999 DARPA Broadcast News Workshop, pages 262--264, Herndon, VA, Feb. 1999.
	7	Thomas Dean , Keiji Kanazawa, A model for reasoning about persistence and causation, Computational Intelligence, v.5 n.3, p.142-150, Aug. 1990 [doi>10.1111/j.1467-8640.1989.tb00324.x]
	8	D. DeVault and M. Stone. Interpreting vague utterances in context. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING '04, pages 1247--1253, 2004.
	9	M. O. Ernst and H. H. Bulthoff. Mergining the sense into a robust percept. TRENDS in Cognitive Science, 8(4):162--169, Apr. 2004.
	10	P. Gorniak and D. Roy. Grounded semantic composition for visual scenes. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 21:429--470, 2004.
	11	N. Haddock. Computational models of incremental semantic interpretation. Language and Congnitive Processes, 4:337--368, 1989.
	12	Michael Johnston , Srinivas Bangalore , Gunaranjan Vasireddy , Amanda Stent , Patrick Ehlen , Marilyn Walker , Steve Whittaker , Preetam Maloor, MATCH: an architecture for multimodal dialogue systems, Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, July 07-12, 2002, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania [doi>10.3115/1073083.1073146]
	13	P. Lamere, P. Kwok, W. Walker, E. Gouvea, R. Singh, B. Raj, and P. Wolf. Design of the CMU Sphinx-4 decoder. In 8th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology (EUROSPEECH 2003), Geneva, Switzerland, Sept. 2003.
	14	G. Miller and N. Chomsky. Finitary models of language users. In R. Luce, R. Bush, and E. Galanter, editors, Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, volume 2, pages 419--491. John Wiley, 1963.
	15	David Milward, Incremental interpretation of Categorial Grammar, Proceedings of the seventh conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, March 27-31, 1995, Dublin, Ireland [doi>10.3115/976973.976991]
	16	K. P. Murphy and M. A. Paskin. Linear time inference in hierarchical hmms. In Proceedings of Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 833--840, 2001.
	17	H. G. Okumo, Y. Nakagawa, and H. Kitano. Integrating auditory and visual perception for robotic soccer players. In Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (IEEE SMC '99) Conference Proceedings, pages 744--749, Tokyo, Japan, Oct. 1999.
	18	Fernando C. N. Pereira , Rebecca N. Wright, Finite-state approximation of phrase structure grammars, Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, p.246-255, June 18-21, 1991, Berkeley, California [doi>10.3115/981344.981376]
	19	S. Pulman. Grammars, parsers and memory limitations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1(3):197--225, 1986.
	20	S. J. Rosenkrantz and P. M. Lewis, II. Deterministic left corner parser. In IEEE Conference Record of the 11th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata, pages 139--152, 1970.
	21	D. Roy. Learning words and syntax for a visual description task. Computer Speech and Language, 16(3):353--385, 2002.
	22	D. Roy, P. Gorniak, N. Mukherjee, and J. Juster. A trainable spoken language understanding system for visual object selection. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP'02), pages 593--596, 2002.
	23	William Schuler, Using model-theoretic semantic interpretation to guide statistical parsing and word recognition in a spoken language interface, Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, p.529-536, July 07-12, 2003, Sapporo, Japan [doi>10.3115/1075096.1075163]
	24	K. Seymore, S. Chen, S.-J. Doh, E. Eskenazi, E. Gouvea, B. Raj, M. Ravishankar, R. Rosenfeld, M. Siegler, R. Stern, and E. Thayer. The 1997 CMU Sphinx 3 English broadcast news transcription system. In Proceedings of the 1998 DARPA Speech Recognition Workshop, pages 55--59, 1998.
	25	Jeffrey Mark Siskind, Visual Event Classification via Force Dynamics, Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Twelfth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, p.149-155, July 30-August 03, 2000
	26	M. K. Tanenhaus, M. J. Spivey-Knowlton, K. M. Eberhard, and J. E. Sedivy. Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268:1632--1634, 1995.
	27	Glenn Wasson , David Kortenkamp , Eric Huber, Integrating active perception with an autonomous robot architecture, Proceedings of the second international conference on Autonomous agents, p.325-331, May 10-13, 1998, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States [doi>10.1145/280765.280850]