User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 125–148 | Cite as

Exploiting temporal and novel information from the user in plan recognition

  • Robin Cohen
  • Fei Song
  • Bruce Spencer
  • Peter Van Beek
Article

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the general topic of recognizing the plan of a user, to include a representation of the user's plans as part of a user model. We focus on extending the coverage of plan recognition, by allowing for additional detail in the user's plan beyond fixed specifications of possible plans in a system's library. We provide procedures for handling two distinct extensions: recognizing temporal constraints from the user and admitting novel information. We conclude by commenting on the importance of these extensions when including plans in a user model in order to enhance communication between the system and the user.

Key words

plan recognition response tailoring temporal analysis novel plans representation of a user's plan 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, J. F.: 1983, Maintaining Knowledge about Temporal Intervals.Communications of the ACM 26, 832–843.Google Scholar
  2. Appelt, D. E. and Pollack, M. E.: 1991, Weighted Abduction for Plan Ascription.UMUAI, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  3. Bratman, M., Israel, D., and Pollack, M.: 1988, Plans and Resource-Bounded Practical Reasoning.Computational Intelligence 4, 349–355.Google Scholar
  4. Calistri-Yeh, R. J.: 1991, Utilizing User Models to Handle Ambiguity and Misconceptions in Robust Plan RecognitionUMUAI, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  5. Carberry, S.: 1985, Pragmatic Modeling in Information System Interfaces. Ph.D. thesis available as University of Delaware Technical Report 86-07, Newark, Del.Google Scholar
  6. Carberry, S.: 1988, Modeling the User's Plans and Goals.Computational Linguistics 14, 23–27.Google Scholar
  7. Carberry, S.: 1989, A Pragmatics-Based Approach to Ellipsis Resolution.Computational Linguistics 15, 75–96.Google Scholar
  8. Charniak, E. and McDermott, D.: 1985,Introduction to Artificial Intelligence, Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, R.: 1987, Analyzing the Structure of Argumentative Discourse.Computational Linguistics 13, 11–24.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, R., Jones, M., Sanumgasunderam, A., Spencer, B., and Dent, L.: 1989, Providing Responses Specific to a User's Goals and Background.International Journal of Expert Systems 2, 135–162.Google Scholar
  11. de Kleer, J.: 1986a, An assumption-based Truth Maintenance System.Artificial Intelligence 28, 127–162.Google Scholar
  12. de Kleer, J.: 1986b, Extending the ATMS.Artificial Intelligence 28, 163–196.Google Scholar
  13. de Kleer, J.: 1988, A General Labelling Algorithm for Assumption based Truth Maintenance.Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, St. Paul, Minn., pp. 188–192.Google Scholar
  14. Eller, R. and Carberry, S.: 1991, A Meta-Rule Approach to Flexible Plan Recognition in Dialogue.UMUAI, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  15. Goodman, B. A. and Litman, D. J.: 1991, On the Interaction between Plan Recognition and Intelligent Interfaces.UMUAI, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  16. Joshi, A., Webber, B., and Weischedel, R.: 1984, Living up to Expectations: Computing Expert Responses.Proceedings of the Third National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Austin, Tex., pp. 169–175.Google Scholar
  17. Kautz, H.: 1987, A Formal Theory of Plan Recognition. Ph.D. thesis available as University of Rochester Technical Report 215, Rochester, N.Y.Google Scholar
  18. Kautz, H. and Allen, J.: 1986, Generalized Plan Recognition.Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Philadelphia, Penn., 32–37.Google Scholar
  19. Katz, M., Chakeres, M., and Bromberg, M.: 1975,Real Stories. Book One, 2nd edition, Globe Book Company, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Konolige, K. and Pollack, M.: 1989, Ascribing Plans to Agents.Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, Mich.Google Scholar
  21. McKeown, K. R., Wish, M., and Matthews, K.: 1985, Tailoring Explanations for the User.Proceedings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles, Calif., pp. 794–798.Google Scholar
  22. Perrault, C.R., Allen, J., and Cohen, P. R.: 1978, Speech Acts as a Basis for Understanding Dialogue Coherence.Proceedings of the Second Conference on Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing (TINLAP), Urbana-Champaign, Ill., pp. 125–132.Google Scholar
  23. Pollack, M.: 1986a, A Model of Plan Inference that Distinguishes Between the Beliefs of Actors and Observers.Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics, New York, N.Y., pp. 207–214.Google Scholar
  24. Pollack, M.: 1986b, Inferring Domain Plans in Question-Answering. Ph.D. thesis (Univ. of Penn.) available as Technical Note 403, SRI International.Google Scholar
  25. Pollack, M.: 1989, Plan Recognition Beyond STRIPS.Proceedings of IJCAI89 Workshop on Plan Recognition.Google Scholar
  26. Poole, D., Goebel, R., and Aleliunas, R.: 1987, Theorist: a logical reasoning system for defaults and diagnosis. InThe Knowledge Frontier: Essays in the Representation of Knowledge, N. Cereone and G. McCalla (eds.), Springer Verlag, New York, pp. 331–352.Google Scholar
  27. Proceedings of the 2nd AAAI Workshop on Plan Recognition: 1989, IJCAI-89, Detroit, Mich.Google Scholar
  28. Raskutti, B. and Zukerman, I.: 1991, Generation and selection of Likely Interpretations during Plan Recognition in Task-Oriented Consultation SystemsUMUAI, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  29. Reichenbach, H.: 1947,Elements of Symbolic Logic, New York, pp. 287–299.Google Scholar
  30. Sider, J. S. and Burger, J. D.: 1991, Intention Structure and Extended Responses in a Portable Natural Language Interface.UMUAI, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  31. Song, R: 1991, A Processing Model for Temporal Analysis and its Application to Plan Recognition. Ph.D. thesis, University of Waterloo.Google Scholar
  32. Song, R and Cohen, R.: 1988, The Interpretation of Temporal Relations in Narrative.Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 745–750.Google Scholar
  33. Song, R and Cohen, R.: 1991, English Tense Structures and Their Processing in the Context of Narrative. In preparation.Google Scholar
  34. Spencer, B.: 1990, Avoiding Duplicate Proofs. InProceedings of the North American Conference on Logic Programming, S. K. Debray and M. Hermenegildo (eds.), MIT Press.Google Scholar
  35. Spencer, B.: 1991, Assimilation in Plan Recognition via Truth Maintenance with Reduced Redundancy. Ph.D. thesis, University of Waterloo. In preparation.Google Scholar
  36. Spencer, B. and van Beek, P.: 1989, Applying Truth Maintenance to a Network of Constraints.Proceedings of the Workshop on Constraint Processing Algorithms and their Applications, IJCAI, Detroit, Mich.Google Scholar
  37. van Beek, P.: 1987, A Model for Generating Better Explanations.Proceedings of the 25th Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Stanford, Calif., pp. 215–220.Google Scholar
  38. van Beek, P.: 1989, Approximation Algorithms for Temporal Reasoning.Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, Mich., pp. 1291–1296.Google Scholar
  39. Webber, B. L.: 1987, The Interpretation of Tense in Discourse.Proceedings of the 25th Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Stanford, Calif., pp. 147–154.Google Scholar
  40. Webber, B. L.: 1988, Tense as Discourse Anaphor.Computational Linguistics 14, 61–73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robin Cohen
    • 1
  • Fei Song
    • 1
  • Bruce Spencer
    • 1
  • Peter Van Beek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations