Advertisement

On the interaction between plan recognition and intelligent interfaces

  • Bradley A. Goodman
  • Diane J. Litman
Article

Abstract

Plan recognition is an active research area in automatic reasoning, as well as a promising approach to engineering interfaces that can exploit models of user's plans and goals. Much research in the field has focused on the development of plan recognition algorithms to support particular user/system interactions, such as found in naturally occurring dialogues. However, two questions have typically remained unexamined: 1) exactly what kind of interface tasks can knowledge of a user's plans be used to support across communication modalities, and 2) how can such tasks in turn constrain development of plan recognition algorithms? In this paper we present a concrete exploration of these issues. In particular, we provide an assessment of plan recognition, with respect to the use of plan recognition in enhancing user interfaces. We clarify how use of a user model containing plans makes interfaces more intelligent and interactive (by providing an intelligent assistant that supports such tasks as advice generation, task completion, context-sensitive responses, error detection and recovery). We then show how interface tasks in turn provide constraints that must be satisfied in order for any plan recognizer to construct and represent a plan in ways that efficiently support these tasks. Finally, we survey how interfaces are fundamentally limited by current plan recognition approaches, and use these limitations to identify and motivate current research. Our research is developed in the context of CHECS, a plan-based design interface.

Key words

plan recognition intelligent interfaces user models multimodal communication computer-aided design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, J. F.: 1983, ‘Recognizing Intentions from Natural Language Utterances’. In: M. Brady and B. Berwick (eds.):Computational Models of Discourse. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Appelt, D. E. and M. E. Pollack: 1992, ‘Weighted Abduction for Plan Ascription’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 2(1/2), 1–25 (this issue).Google Scholar
  3. Ayuso, D. M.: 1989, ‘Discourse Entities in Janus’. 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, pp. 243–250.Google Scholar
  4. Beltramini, L. and R. L. Motard: 1988, ‘KNOD — A Knowledge Based Approach for Process Design’.Computers in Chemical Engineering 12(9/10), 939–958.Google Scholar
  5. Brachman, R. J. and J. G. Schmolze: 1985, ‘An Overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System’.Cognitive Science 9, 171–216.Google Scholar
  6. Burger, J.: 1989, ‘User Models for Intelligent Interfaces’. IJCAI Workshop on Intelligent Interfaces, Detroit, MI.Google Scholar
  7. Calistri-Yeh, R.: 1991, ‘Utilizing User Models to Handle Ambiguity and Misconceptions in Robust Plan Communication’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 1(4), 289–322.Google Scholar
  8. Carberry, M. S.: 1985, ‘Pragmatic Modeling in Information System Interfaces’. PhD thesis, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
  9. Carberry, S.: 1986, ‘User Models: The Problem of Disparity’, 11th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Bonn, Germany, pp. 29–34.Google Scholar
  10. Carberry, S.: 1988, ‘Modeling the User's Plans and Goals’.Computational Linguistics 14(3), 23–37.Google Scholar
  11. Carberry, S.: 1990, ‘Incorporating Default Inferences into Plan Recognition. Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, Ma., pp. 471–478.Google Scholar
  12. Carver, N. F., V. R. Lesser, and D. L. McCue: 1984, ‘Focusing in Plan Recognition’. Fourth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  13. Chin, D.: 1988, ‘Exploiting User Expertise in Answer Expression’. Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, St. Paul, Mn., pp. 756–760.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, P., C. Perrault, and J. Allen: 1982, ‘Beyond Question Answering’. In: W. Lehnert and M. Ringle (eds.):Strategies for Natural Language Processing, Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc.Google Scholar
  15. Cohen, P. R. and H. J. Levesque: 1990, ‘Persistence, Intention, and Commitment’. In: P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollack (eds.):Intentions in Communication. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press, pp. 33–70.Google Scholar
  16. Cohen, R., F. Song, B. Spencer, and P. van Beek: 1991, ‘Exploiting Temporal and Novel Information from the User in Plan Recognition’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 1(2), 125–148.Google Scholar
  17. de Kleer, J.: 1986, ‘An Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance System’.Artificial Intelligence 28, 127–162.Google Scholar
  18. Eller, R. and S. Carberry: 1992, ‘A Meta-Rule Approach To Flexible Plan Recognition in Dialogue’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 2(1/2), 27–53 (this issue).Google Scholar
  19. Feiner, S. and K. McKeown: 1990, ‘Coordinating Text and Graphics in Explanation Generation’. Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, Ma., pp. 442–449.Google Scholar
  20. Fischer, G. and C. Rathke: 1988, ‘Knowledge-Based Spreadsheets’. Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, St. Paul, Mn., pp. 802–807.Google Scholar
  21. Fischer, G. and A. Morch: 1988, ‘CRACK: A Critiquing Approach to Cooperative Kitchen Design’. International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  22. Genesereth, M. R.: 1979, ‘The Role of Plans in Automated Consultation’. IJCAI-79, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 311–313.Google Scholar
  23. Goldman, R. and E. Charniak: 1988, ‘A Probabilistic ATMS for Plan Recognition’. AAAI-88 Workshop on Plan Recognition, St. Paul, Mn.Google Scholar
  24. Goodman, B. A.: 1986, ‘Reference Identification and Reference Identification Failures’.Computational Linguistics 12(4), 273–305.Google Scholar
  25. Goodman, B. A. and D. J. Litman: 1989, ‘Design Interfaces and Plan Recognition’. Report No. 7103, BBN Systems and Technologies Corporation, Cambridge, Ma.Google Scholar
  26. Goodman, B. A. and D. J. Litman: 1990, ‘Plan Recognition for Intelligent Interfaces’. IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applications, Santa Barbara, Ca.Google Scholar
  27. Grosz, B. J.: 1977, ‘The Representation and Use of Focus in Dialogue Understanding’. Technical Note 151 (Ph.D. thesis), SRI International, Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
  28. Grosz, B. J. and C. L. Sidner: 1990, ‘Plans in Discourse’. In: P. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. Pollack (eds.):Intentions in Communication. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Huff, K. and V. Lesser: 1988, ‘A Plan-Based Intelligent Assistant That Supports the Software Development Process’. Third Symposium on Software Development Environments, Boston, Ma.Google Scholar
  30. Kautz, H. A.: 1987, ‘A Formal Theory of Plan Recognition’. PhD thesis, University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y.Google Scholar
  31. Kobsa, A. and W. Wahlster (eds.): 1989,User Models in Dialog Systems, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  32. Kobsa, A., J. Allgayer, C. Reddig, N. Reithinger, D. Schmauks, K. Harbusch, and W. Wahlster: 1986, ‘Combining Deictic Gestures and Natural Language for Referent Identification’. Eleventh International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Bonn, Germany, pp. 356–361.Google Scholar
  33. Konolige, K. and M. E. Pollack: 1989, ‘Ascribing Plans to Agents’. Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, Mi., pp. 924–930.Google Scholar
  34. Lemke, A. C. and G. Fischer: 1990, ‘A Cooperative Problem Solving System for Interface Design’. Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, Ma., pp. 479–484.Google Scholar
  35. Litman, D. J. and J. F. Allen: 1987, ‘A Plan Recognition Model for Subdialogues in Conversations’.Cognitive Science 11, 163–200.Google Scholar
  36. Litman, D. J. and B. A. Goodman: 1989, ‘A Knowledge-Based Interface for Process Design’. Third International Conference on Expert Systems and the Leading Edge in Production and Operations Management, Hilton Head Island, SC.Google Scholar
  37. Mark, W.: 1980, ‘Rule-Based Inference in Large Knowledge Bases’. First Annual National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Ca., pp. 190–194.Google Scholar
  38. McCarthy, J.: 1980, ‘Circumscription — A Form of Non-Monotonic Reasoning’.Artificial Intelligence 13, 27–39.Google Scholar
  39. McCabe, W. L., J. C. Smith, and P. Harriott: 1967,Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
  40. Myers, D. R., J. F. Davis, and D. J. Herman: 1988, ‘A Task-Oriented Approach to Knowledge-Based Systems for Process Engineering Design’.Computers in Chemical Engineering 12(9/10), 959–971.Google Scholar
  41. National Research Council: 1988,Frontiers in Chemical Engineering: Research Needs and Opportunities. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  42. Perrault, C. R.: 1990, ‘An Application of Default Logic to Speech Act Theory’. In: P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollack (eds.):Intentions in Communication. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press, pp. 161–186.Google Scholar
  43. Pollack, M. E.: 1986, ‘Inferring Domain Plans in Question-Answering’. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.Google Scholar
  44. Raskutti, B. and I. Zukerman: 1991, ‘Generation and Selection of Likely Interpretations during Plan Recognition in Task-Oriented Consultation Systems’.User Modeling and User Adapted Interaction 1(4), 323–353.Google Scholar
  45. Sacerdoti, E. D.: 1974, ‘Planning in a Hierarchy of Abstraction Spaces’.Artificial Intelligence 5, 115–135.Google Scholar
  46. Schank, R. C. and C. J. Rieger: 1974, ‘Inferences and the Computer Understanding of Natural Language’.Artificial Intelligence 5, 333–412.Google Scholar
  47. Schmidt, C. F., N. S. Sridharan, and J. L. Goodson: 1978, ‘The Plan Recognition Problem: An Intersection of Psychology and Artificial Intelligence’.Artificial Intelligence 11, 45–83.Google Scholar
  48. Sider, J. and J. Burger: 1992, ‘Discourse Understanding in Expert System Interfaces’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 2(1/2), 155–179 (this issue).Google Scholar
  49. Sidner, C. L.: 1985, ‘Plan Parsing for Intended Response Recognition in Discourse’.Computational Intelligence 1(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
  50. Tenenberg, J.: 1987, ‘Preserving Consistency across Abstraction Mappings’, IJCAI-87, Milan, Italy, pp. 1011–1014.Google Scholar
  51. Tong, C: 1987, ‘AI in Engineering Design’.Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 2(3), 130–132.Google Scholar
  52. Wheelden, B.: 1988, Unpublished document. ‘Computer Resources International”. Denmark.Google Scholar
  53. Wilensky, R.: 1983,Planning and Understanding. Reading, Ma.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  54. Wilensky, R., D. N. Chin, M. Luria, J. Martin, J. Mayfield, and D. Wu: 1988, ‘The Berkeley UNIX Consultant Project’.Computational Linguistics 14(4), 35–84.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bradley A. Goodman
    • 1
  • Diane J. Litman
    • 2
  1. 1.The MITRE CorporationBedfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations