Esprit ’89 pp 288-301 | Cite as

Advice-Giving Dialogue: An Integrated System

  • Didier Bronisz
  • Thomas Grossi
  • Francois Jean-Marie
Conference paper

Abstract

In this paper we present the implementation of an advice-giving system for financial investment for the final phase of the project Esteam-316. (This work was supported in part by the Commission of the European Communities as Esprit project 316 Esteam-316.) This system integrates multiple agents in a single architecture allowing cooperation between a natural language dialoguer, “intelligent” data base access modules, and a problem solver in the financial domain. Using a user model, this system adapts the mixed initiative dialogue during both the formulation of the problem and its resolution by the expert. A novice user has access to expert knowledge despite the weakness of his own knowledge.

After presenting the project Esteam-316 and the communicative structure of the implemented system, we give an example of a dialogue. With this example and its analysis we present the internal structure of the dialoguer and the details of its user model approach.

Keywords

Expert System Problem Solver Inference Engine Query Evaluation Investment Plan 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    J.F. Allen and C.R. Perrault, “Analyzing intentions in utterances”. Artificial Intelligence, 3(15):143- 178,1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Bruffaerts and E. Henin, Proof Trees for Negation as Failure: Yet Another Prolog Meta-lnter- preter, in: Logic Programming, Proc. of the Fifth International Conference and Symposium, Seattle, August 15–19,1988.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. Bruffaerts and E. Henin, Some Claims about Effective Explanation Generation in Expert Systems, in: Proc. oftheAAAI’88 Workshop on Explanation Saint Paul, August 22,1988, 83–86.Google Scholar
  4. A. Bruffaerts and E. Henin, Negation as Failure: Proofs, Inference Rules and Meta-interpreters, Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic Programming (META-88), H. Abramson and M. Rogers (eds.), Bristol, June 22–24,1988, The M.L.T. Press (in preparation).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Bruffaerts, E. Henin and A. Pirotte, A Sound Basis for the Generation of Explanations in Expert Systems, Philips Technical Review, Vol. 44, no 8/9/10, pp. 287–295, May 1989.Google Scholar
  6. A. Bruffaerts and E. Henin, La construction de bases de connaissance pour les systemes experts, in: Approche logique de /’intelligence artificielle, A. Thayse (Ed.), Dunod (in preparation).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    K.L. Clark, Negation as Failure, in: Logic and Databases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker (Eds), Plenum Press, New-York, 1978, 293–322.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    P. P. Chen, “The Entity / Relationship Model: toward a unified view of data. ” ACM TODS, Vol 1, Num 1 March 1976.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    F. Cuppens, R. Demolombe. Cooperative Answering : a methodology to to provide intelligent access to a Database. Proceedings of 2d Int.Conf. on Expert Database Systems. The Benjamin/Cum- mings Publishing Company. 1988.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Decitre, T. Grossi, C. Jullien, J.-P. Solvay, “Planning for Problem Formulation in Advice-Giving Dialogue. ” Proceedings of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 1987.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. Hanet, The Problem Solver, in: Deliverable no. 16, ESTEAM-316 Esprit Project, July 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    C. Jullien, J.P. Solvay, “Person-Machine Dialogue for Expert Systems: The Advice-Giving Case. ” Proc. 7th Int. Workshop Expert Systems & their applications Avignon, 1987.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    C. Jullien, J.C. Marty, “Plan Revision in Person-Machine Dialogue.”,4th conf. of the European Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics, Manchester, April 1989.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    K. Kunen, Signed Data Dependencies in Logic Programs, Computer Sciences Technical Report #719, University of Wisconsin, Madison, October 1987.Google Scholar
  15. D.J. Litman and J.F. Allen, “A Plan Recognition Model for Subdialogues in Conversations.” Technical Report TR 141, Computer Science Dpt., University of Rochester, November 84.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Barbara J. Grosz and Candace L. Sidner, “Attention, intentions and the structure of dicourse.” Computational Linguistics, 12(3): 175–205,1986.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Barbara J. Grosz, “Discourse Stucture and the Proper Treatment of Interruptions.” Proceedings of the IXth IJCAI, Los Angeles (USA), 1985.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    J.W. Uoyd, Foundations of Logic Programming, Second, Extended Edition, Springer-Verlag, 1987.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ECSC, EEC, EAEC, Brussels and Luxembourg 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Didier Bronisz
    • 1
  • Thomas Grossi
  • Francois Jean-Marie
  1. 1.Cap Sesa InnovationGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations