Advertisement

KI - Künstliche Intelligenz

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 53–61 | Cite as

Desiderata for the Design of Companion Systems

Insights from a Large Scale Wizard of Oz Experiment
  • Dietmar Rösner
  • Matthias Haase
  • Thomas Bauer
  • Stephan Günther
  • Julia Krüger
  • Jörg Frommer
Technical Contribution

Abstract

We report about evaluations of the LAST MINUTE corpus which comprises multimodal recordings (audio, video, biopsychological data, verbatim transcripts, psychological questionnaires, in-depth user interviews) of Wizard of Oz simulated naturalistic human companion interactions in German. Based on the results of these analyses we discuss consequences for the design of future companion systems.

Keywords

Human companion interaction Naturalistic corpora Wizard of Oz experiments 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The presented study is performed in the framework of the Transregional Collaborative Research Centre SFB/TRR 62 “A Companion-Technology for Cognitive Technical Systems” funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). We thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable constructive feedback. The responsibility for the content of this paper remains with the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Borkenau P, Ostendorf F (2008) NEO-Fünf-Faktoren-Inventar nach Costa und McCrae: 2. neu normierte und vollständig überarbeitete Auflage. Hogrefe, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Core M, Allen J (1997) Coding dialogs with the DAMSL annotation scheme. In: AAAI fall symposium on communicative action in humans and machines, pp 28–35Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fellbaum C (1998) WordNet: an electronic lexical database. Bradford Books, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Frommer J, Rösner D, Haase M, Lange J, Friesen R, Otto M (2012) Früherkennung und Verhinderung negativer Dialogverläufe—Operatormanual für das Wizard of Oz-Experiment. Pabst Science Publishers, LengerichGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jurafsky D, Martin JH (2008) Speech and language processing: an introduction to natural language processing, computational linguistics, and speech recognition, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krüger J, Wahl M, Frommer J (2015) Making the system a relational partner: users’ ascriptions in individualization-focused interactions with companion-systems. In: CENTRIC’15, the eighth international conference on advances in human-oriented and personalized mechanisms, technologies, and services. IARIA XPS Press, Barcelona (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Legát M, Grůber M, Ircing P (2008) Wizard of Oz data collection for the Czech senior companion dialogue system. In: Fourth int. workshop on human–computer conversation. University of Sheffield, Sheffield, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mayring P (2004) Qualitative content analysis. In: Flick U, von Kardoff E, Steinke I (eds) A companion to qualitative research. SAGE, GlasgowGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mori M, MacDorman KF, Kageki N (2012) The uncanny valley [from the field]. Robot Autom Mag IEEE 19(2):98–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rösner D, Friesen R, Günther S, Andrich R (2014) Modeling and evaluating dialog success in the LAST MINUTE corpus. In: Proc. of LREC’14. ELRA, ReykjavikGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schneider TR, Rench TA, Lyons JB, Riffle RR (2012) The influence of neuroticism, extraversion and openness on stress responses. Stress Health J Int Soc Investig Stress 28(2):102–110. doi: 10.1002/smi.1409 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Webb N, Benyon D, Bradley J, Hansen P, Mival O (2010) Wizard of Oz experiments for a companion dialogue system: eliciting companionable conversation. In: Proc. of LREC’10. ELRAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wilks Y (2010) Close engagements with artificial companions: key social, psychological, ethical and design issues, vol 8. John Benjamins Publishing, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wolters M, Georgila K, Moore J, MacPherson S (2009) Being old doesn’t mean acting old: how older users interact with spoken dialog systems. ACM Trans Access Comput 2(1):2:1–2:39Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dietmar Rösner
    • 1
  • Matthias Haase
    • 2
  • Thomas Bauer
    • 1
  • Stephan Günther
    • 1
  • Julia Krüger
    • 2
  • Jörg Frommer
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut für Wissens- und Sprachverarbeitung (IWS)Otto-von-Guericke UniversitätMagdeburgGermany
  2. 2.Universitätsklinik für Psychosomatische Medizin und PsychotherapieOtto-von-Guericke UniversitätMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations