Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning

Mary Ellen Foster, Ronald P. A. Petrick

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Numerous toolkits are available for developing speech-based dialogue systems. We survey a range of currently available toolkits, highlighting the different facilities provided by each. Most of these toolkits include not only a method for representing states and actions, but also a mechanism for reasoning about and selecting the actions, often combined with a technical framework designed to simplify the task of creating end-to-end systems. This near-universal tight coupling of representation, reasoning, and implementation in a single toolkit makes it difficult both to compare different approaches to dialogue system design, as well as to analyse the properties of individual techniques. We contrast this situation with the state of the art in a related research area—automated planning—where a set of common representations have been defined and are widely used to enable direct comparison of different reasoning approaches. We argue that adopting a similar separation would greatly benefit the dialogue research community.

LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationDialogues with Social Robots
Subtitle of host publicationEnablements, Analyses, and Evaluation
EditorsKristiina Jokinen, Graham Wilcock
PublisherSpringer
Pages93-107
Number of pages15
ISBN (Electronic)9789811025853
ISBN (Print)9789811025846
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 25 Dec 2016

Publication series

NameLecture Notes in Electrical Engineering
PublisherSpringer Singapore
Volume427
ISSN (Print)1876-1100
ISSN (Electronic)1876-1119

Fingerprint

Planning
Systems analysis

Keywords

  • Automated planning
  • Interaction management
  • Representation and reasoning
  • Systems integration

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Cite this

Foster, M. E., & Petrick, R. P. A. (2016). Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning. In K. Jokinen, & G. Wilcock (Eds.), Dialogues with Social Robots: Enablements, Analyses, and Evaluation (pp. 93-107). (Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering; Vol. 427). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2585-3_7
Foster, Mary Ellen ; Petrick, Ronald P. A. / Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning. Dialogues with Social Robots: Enablements, Analyses, and Evaluation. editor / Kristiina Jokinen ; Graham Wilcock. Springer, 2016. pp. 93-107 (Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering).
@inbook{df0fba62896949cbb9ce9ee935d575b0,
title = "Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning",
abstract = "Numerous toolkits are available for developing speech-based dialogue systems. We survey a range of currently available toolkits, highlighting the different facilities provided by each. Most of these toolkits include not only a method for representing states and actions, but also a mechanism for reasoning about and selecting the actions, often combined with a technical framework designed to simplify the task of creating end-to-end systems. This near-universal tight coupling of representation, reasoning, and implementation in a single toolkit makes it difficult both to compare different approaches to dialogue system design, as well as to analyse the properties of individual techniques. We contrast this situation with the state of the art in a related research area—automated planning—where a set of common representations have been defined and are widely used to enable direct comparison of different reasoning approaches. We argue that adopting a similar separation would greatly benefit the dialogue research community.",
keywords = "Automated planning, Interaction management, Representation and reasoning, Systems integration",
author = "Foster, {Mary Ellen} and Petrick, {Ronald P. A.}",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "25",
doi = "10.1007/978-981-10-2585-3_7",
language = "English",
isbn = "9789811025846",
series = "Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering",
publisher = "Springer",
pages = "93--107",
editor = "Kristiina Jokinen and Graham Wilcock",
booktitle = "Dialogues with Social Robots",

}

Foster, ME & Petrick, RPA 2016, Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning. in K Jokinen & G Wilcock (eds), Dialogues with Social Robots: Enablements, Analyses, and Evaluation. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol. 427, Springer, pp. 93-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2585-3_7

Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning. / Foster, Mary Ellen; Petrick, Ronald P. A.

Dialogues with Social Robots: Enablements, Analyses, and Evaluation. ed. / Kristiina Jokinen; Graham Wilcock. Springer, 2016. p. 93-107 (Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering; Vol. 427).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning

AU - Foster, Mary Ellen

AU - Petrick, Ronald P. A.

PY - 2016/12/25

Y1 - 2016/12/25

N2 - Numerous toolkits are available for developing speech-based dialogue systems. We survey a range of currently available toolkits, highlighting the different facilities provided by each. Most of these toolkits include not only a method for representing states and actions, but also a mechanism for reasoning about and selecting the actions, often combined with a technical framework designed to simplify the task of creating end-to-end systems. This near-universal tight coupling of representation, reasoning, and implementation in a single toolkit makes it difficult both to compare different approaches to dialogue system design, as well as to analyse the properties of individual techniques. We contrast this situation with the state of the art in a related research area—automated planning—where a set of common representations have been defined and are widely used to enable direct comparison of different reasoning approaches. We argue that adopting a similar separation would greatly benefit the dialogue research community.

AB - Numerous toolkits are available for developing speech-based dialogue systems. We survey a range of currently available toolkits, highlighting the different facilities provided by each. Most of these toolkits include not only a method for representing states and actions, but also a mechanism for reasoning about and selecting the actions, often combined with a technical framework designed to simplify the task of creating end-to-end systems. This near-universal tight coupling of representation, reasoning, and implementation in a single toolkit makes it difficult both to compare different approaches to dialogue system design, as well as to analyse the properties of individual techniques. We contrast this situation with the state of the art in a related research area—automated planning—where a set of common representations have been defined and are widely used to enable direct comparison of different reasoning approaches. We argue that adopting a similar separation would greatly benefit the dialogue research community.

KW - Automated planning

KW - Interaction management

KW - Representation and reasoning

KW - Systems integration

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85009461246&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-981-10-2585-3_7

DO - 10.1007/978-981-10-2585-3_7

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9789811025846

T3 - Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering

SP - 93

EP - 107

BT - Dialogues with Social Robots

A2 - Jokinen, Kristiina

A2 - Wilcock, Graham

PB - Springer

ER -

Foster ME, Petrick RPA. Separating Representation, Reasoning, and Implementation for Interaction Management: Lessons from Automated Planning. In Jokinen K, Wilcock G, editors, Dialogues with Social Robots: Enablements, Analyses, and Evaluation. Springer. 2016. p. 93-107. (Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2585-3_7