Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A reactive-deliberative model of dialogue agency

  • Part IV: Theories
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Intelligent Agents III Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL 1996)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1193))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

For an agent to engage in substantive dialogues with other agents, there are several complexities which go beyond the scope of standard models of rational agency. In particular, an agent must reason about social attitudes that span more than one agent, as well as the dynamic and fallible process of plan execution. In this paper we sketch a theory of plan execution which allows the representation of failure and repair, extend the underlying agency model with social attitudes of mutual belief, obligation, and multi-agent plan execution, and describe an implemented dialogue agent which uses these notions, reacting to its environment and mental state, and deliberating and planning action only when more pressing concerns are absent.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. James F. Allen and C. Raymond Perrault. Analyzing intention in utterances. Artificial Intelligence, 15(3):143–178, 1980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. James. F. Allen, L. K. Schubert, G. Ferguson, P. Heeman, C. H. Hwang, T. Kato, M. Light, N. Martin, B. Miller, M. Poesio, and D. R. Traum. The TRAINS project: a case study in building a conversational planning agent. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 7:7–48, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cecile T. Balkanski. Modelling act-type relations in collaborative activity. Technical Report 23-90, Harvard University Center for Research in Computing Technology, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jon Barwise. The Situation in Logic, chapter 9: On the Model Theory of Common Knowledge. CSLI Lecture Notes: Number 17. Center for The Study of Language and Information, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Michael E. Bratman, David J. Israel, and Martha E. Pollack. Plans and resource-bounded practical reasoning. Computational Intelligence, 4:349–355, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Bretier and M. D. Sadek. A rational agent as the kernel of a cooperative spoken dialogue system: Implementing a logical theory of interaction. In J. P. Müller, M. J. Wooldridge, and N. R. Jennings, editors, Intelligent Agents III — Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL-96), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1996. In this volume.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Herbert H. Clark. Arenas of Language Use. University of Chicago Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Herbert H. Clark and Edward F. Schaefer. Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13:259–294, 1989. Also appears as Chapter 5 in [7].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Phillip R. Cohen and Hector J. Levesque. Confirmations and joint action. In Proceedings IJCAI-91, pages 951–957, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Phillip R. Cohen and C. R. Perrault. Elements of a plan-based theory of speech acts. Cognitive Science, 3(3):177–212, 1979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. F. Dignum and B. van Linder. Modeling social agents: Communication as action. In J. P. Müller, M. J. Wooldridge, and N. R. Jennings, editors, Intelligent Agents III — Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL-96), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1996. In this volume.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Alvin I. Goldman. A Theory of Human Action. Prentice Hall Inc., 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barbara J. Grosz and Sarit Kraus. Collaborative plans for group activities. In Proceedings IJCAI-93, pages 367–373, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Barbara J. Grosz and Candace L. Sidner. Plans for discourse. In P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollack, editors, Intentions in Communication. MIT Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Y. Halpern and Y. Moses. Knowledge and common knowledge in a distributed environment. Journal of the ACM, 37(3):549–587, 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jerry Hobbs. Ontological promiscuity. In Proceedings ACL-85, pages 61–69, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  17. L. Thorne McCarty. Permissions and obligations: An informal introduction. Technical Report LRP-TR-19, Dept. of Computer Science, Rutgers University, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Martha E. Pollack. Plans as complex mental attitudes. In P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollack, editors, Intentions in Communication. MIT Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Martha E. Pollack. Inferring Domain Plans in Question-Answering. PhD thesis, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, May 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Yoav Shoham and Moshe Tennenholtz. On the synthesis of useful social laws for artificial agent societies. In Proceedings AAAI-92, pages 276–281, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  21. David R. Traum. A Computational Theory of Grounding in Natural Language Conversation. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester, 1994. Also available as TR 545, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester.

    Google Scholar 

  22. David R. Traum and James F. Allen. A speech acts approach to grounding in conversation. In Proceedings 2nd International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP-92), pages 137–40, October 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  23. David R. Traum and James F. Allen. Discourse obligations in dialogue processing. In Proceedings of the 32 th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1–8, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  24. David R. Traum and James F. Allen. Towards a formal theory of repair in plan execution and plan recognition. In Proceedings of the 13th Workshop of the UK Planning and Scheduling Special Interest Group, September 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  25. David R. Traum and Elizabeth A. Hinkelman. Conversation acts in task-oriented spoken dialogue. Computational Intelligence, 8(3):575–599, 1992. Special Issue on Non-literal language.

    Google Scholar 

  26. David R. Traum, L. K. Schubert, M. Poesio, N. G. Martin, M. Light, C. H. Hwang, P. Heeman, G. Ferguson, and J. F. Allen. Knowledge representation in the TRAINS-93 conversation system. International Journal of Expert Systems, to appear 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  27. G. H. von Wright. Deontic logic. Mind, 60:1–15, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UMIACS, University of Maryland, A. V. Williams Building, 20742, College Park, MD, USA

    David R. Traum

Authors
  1. David R. Traum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Jörg P. Müller Michael J. Wooldridge Nicholas R. Jennings

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Traum, D.R. (1997). A reactive-deliberative model of dialogue agency. In: Müller, J.P., Wooldridge, M.J., Jennings, N.R. (eds) Intelligent Agents III Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages. ATAL 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1193. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0013584

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0013584

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-62507-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68057-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation