Advertisement

Automatically Generating Engaging Presentation Slide Decks

  • Thomas WintersEmail author
  • Kory W. MathewsonEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11453)

Abstract

Talented public speakers have thousands of hours of practice. One means of improving public speaking skills is practice through improvisation, e.g. presenting an improvised presentation using an unseen slide deck. We present Tedric, a novel system capable of generating coherent slide decks based on a single topic suggestion. It combines semantic word webs with text and image data sources to create an engaging slide deck with an overarching theme. We found that audience members perceived the quality of improvised presentations using these generated slide decks to be on par with presentations using human created slide decks for the Improvised TED Talk performance format. Tedric is thus a valuable new creative tool for improvisers to perform with, and for anyone looking to improve their presentation skills.

Keywords

Computer-aided and computational creativity Generation Computational intelligence for human creativity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thank you to the reviewers for their time and attention reviewing this work, as well as for the insightful comments. Thanks to Julian Faid and Dr. Piotr Mirowski for advice and support in the creation of the software. Thank you to Lana Cuthbertson, the producer of TEDxRFT, and to the talented individuals at Rapid Fire Theatre for supporting innovative art. Thank you to all the performers who have done improvised TED talks and shared their views and opinions on how to structure and frame, your help in building the design guide was critical. Thanks to Shaun Farrugia for creating and hosting an online demo of Tedric, making it more easily available for performers of any background to use the system. Thank you to volunteers from the Belgian improvisational comedy group Preparee for volunteering for the evaluation.

References

  1. 1.
    Wilbur, P.K.: Stand up, Speak up, or Shut up. Dembner Books, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dwyer, K.K., Davidson, M.M.: Is public speaking really more feared than death? Commun. Res. Rep. 29(2), 99–107 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee, S.: Study on the classification of speech anxiety using q-methodology analysis. Adv. Journalism Commun. 2(03), 69 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Watson, K.: Perspective: Serious play: teaching medical skills with improvisational theater techniques. Acad. Med. 86(10), 1260–1265 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    King, B.T., Janis, I.L.: Comparison of the effectiveness of improvised versus non-improvised role-playing in producing opinion changes. Hum. Relat. 9(2), 177–186 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mathewson, K.W.: Improvised ted talks (2018). https://korymathewson.com/improvised-ted-talks/
  7. 7.
    Winiger, S.: Ted-RNN – machine generated ted-talks (2015). https://medium.com/@samim/ted-rnn-machine-generated-ted-talks-3dd682b894c0
  8. 8.
    Knight, H.: Silicon-based comedy (2010). https://www.ted.com/talks/heather_knight_silicon_based_comedy
  9. 9.
    Mathewson, K.W., Mirowski, P.: Improvised theatre alongside artificial intelligences. In: AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hu, Y., Wan, X.: PPSGen: learning-based presentation slides generation for academic papers. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 27(4), 1085–1097 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ranjan, A., Gangadhare, A., Shinde, S.V.: A review on learning based automatic PPT generation using machine learning. Int. J. Sci. Res. Comput. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. (IJSRCSEIT) 3, 547–552 (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sravanthi, M., Chowdary, C.R., Kumar, P.S.: SlidesGen: automatic generation of presentation slides for a technical paper using summarization. In: FLAIRS Conference (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Beyer, A.M.: Improving student presentations: Pecha Kucha and Just Plain PowerPoint. Teach. Psychol. 38(2), 122–126 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Binsted, K., Ritchie, G.: An implemented model of punning riddles. CoRR abs/cmp-lg/9406022 (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Manurung, R., Ritchie, G., Pain, H., Waller, A., Mara, D., Black, R.: The construction of a pun generator for language skills development. Appl. Artif. Intell. 22(9), 841–869 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Venour, C.: The computational generation of a class of puns. Master’s thesis, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Winters, T., Nys, V., De Schreye, D.: Automatic joke generation: learning humor from examples. In: Streitz, N., Konomi, S. (eds.) DAPI 2018. LNCS, vol. 10922, pp. 360–377. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91131-1_28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu, H., Singh, P.: ConceptNet: a practical commonsense reasoning tool-kit. BT Technol. J. 22(4), 211–226 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Compton, K., Kybartas, B., Mateas, M.: Tracery: an author-focused generative text tool. In: Schoenau-Fog, H., Bruni, L.E., Louchart, S., Baceviciute, S. (eds.) ICIDS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9445, pp. 154–161. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27036-4_14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jaques, N., Engel, J., Ha, D., Bertsch, F., Picard, R., Eck, D.: Learning via social awareness: improving sketch representations with facial feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.04877 (2018)

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.KU LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.University of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations