Detecting Uncertainty in Spoken Dialogues: An Exploratory Research for the Automatic Detection of Speaker Uncertainty by Using Prosodic Markers
This paper reports results in automatic detection of speaker uncertainty in spoken dialogues by using prosodic markers. For this purpose a substantial part of the AMI corpus (a multi-modal multi-party meeting corpus) has been selected and converted to a suitable format so its data could be analyzed for a selected set of prosodic features. In the absence of relevant stance annotations on (un)certainty, lexical markers (hedges) have been used to mark utterances as (un)certain. Results show that prosodic features can indeed be used to detect speaker uncertainty in spoken dialogues. The classifiers can tell uncertain from neutral utterances with an accuracy of 75% which is 25% over the baseline.
KeywordsSpeaker’s epistemic stance Dialogue corpus analysis Machine learning
This work is supported by the European IST Programme Project FP6-033812. This article only reflects the authors’ views and funding agencies are not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.
- 1.Ainley, J. 1988. Perceptions of teachers’ questioning styles. In 12th International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 99–99, Vezprém, Hungary.Google Scholar
- 3.Bhatt, K., M. Evens, and S. Argamon. 2004. Hedged responses and expressions of affect in human/human and human/computer tutorial interactions. In 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
- 4.Boersma, P., and Weenink, D. 2008. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.0.06 [Software]. Available: http://www.praat.org/.
- 8.Liscombe, J., J. Hirschberg, and J. J. Venditti. 2005. Detecting certainness in spoken tutorial dialogues. In 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, 1837–1840. Lisbon.Google Scholar
- 10.Rietveld, A. C. M., and V. J. Van Heuven. 1997. Algemene Fonetiek. Bussum: Uitgeverij Coutinho.Google Scholar