| Clark, H. & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39 |
....working as a team, and as a team they attempt to optimize the team s performance and minimize the team s consumption of resources. This follows from Clark s assumption that conversants in dialogue attempt to achieve their dialogue purpose with LEAST COLLAB ORATVE EFFORT[Clark and Schaefer, 1989; Clark and Wilkes Gibbs, 1986; Clark and Brennan, 1990] This approach contrasts with other approaches in which agents only participate in communication to the degree that it maxi mizes their own expected utility [Durfee et el. 1994] A final choice has to do with which processes collaborative effort consists of. A common ....
Herbert H. Clark and Deanna Wilkes-Gibbs. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1-39, 1986.
....view, agreeing on what has been said, and what is meant, is crucial to conversation. The part of what has been said that the interlocutors understand to be mutually shared is called the common ground, and the process of establishing parts of the conversation as shared is called grounding [1] As [2] point out, participants in a conversation attempt to minimize the effort expended in grounding. Thus, interlocutors do not always convey all the information at their disposal; sometimes it takes less effort to produce an incomplete utterance that can be repaired if needs be. 3] has proposed a ....
....0.30 Assertion negative within: gaze pause: gaze ungrounded go ahead: 0.27 elaboration:0.73 positive within: gaze pause: map grounded go ahead: 0.83 elaboration: 0.17 Answer negative pause: gaze ungrounded go ahead: 0.22 elaboration: 0. 78 [1] U: How do I get to Room 309 [2] M: To get to Room 309, go to that door and make a right. 3] M: Walk down the hall and make a left at the door [4] M: It s the glass door with red couches right outside. 5] M: And that s Room 309. look at map look at map look at map gaze at MACK [2] M: To get to Room 309, go to that door ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Clark, H.H. and D. Wilkes-Gibbs, Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 1986. 22: p. 1-39.
....well formed, and appropriate to the dialogue context. Sixty colleagues not involved in this research completed the experiment. In this evaluation technique the human subject is essentially an overhearer of the original conversation and makes judgements based on his or her overhearer status [7]. The remainder of this section describes the five sentence planners that we compare in more detail. SPOT, the two rule based systems, and the two baseline sentence planners are all NLG based sentence planners. We described SPoT above. In all of the NLG sentence planners, each speech act is ....
Herbert H. Clark and Deanna Wilkes-Gibbs. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1-39, 1986.
....an opportunity for other developers to perform the role of future readers, but they are not usually held for this purpose) This form of communication is significantly different from the collaborative process that underlies most human communication. For instance, a study by Clark and Wilkes Gibbs [50] showed how two people work together in the creation of agreed references (to complex Figure 22: Similarity tree for duty . The first value is the computed similarity of the word to its parent (in the tree) the second value its similarity to duty . From Lin [174] shapes) The results also ....
Herbert H. Clark and Deanna Wilkes-Gibbs. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1 39, 1986.
....are welldefined objects represented as boxes on the map. Areas are more ill defined objects, and there is less mutual knowledge between the speakers about the meaning (i.e. extension) of such referents. 2. BACKGROUND 2.1. Coordination of referring expressions As Clark and Wilkes Gibbs [7] have demonstrated, referring is a collaborative process between speaker and hearer. In constructing the referring expression, the speaker tries to get the hearer to identify the object that he has in mind. But since the speaker and the hearer will inevitably have somewhat different beliefs about ....
Clark, H. H. & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1992). Referring as a Collaborative Process. In H. H. Clark (Ed.), Arenas of Language Use, 107-143. Chicago: University Press.
....Section 4 deals with constructive planning and goal formulation. Finally, section 5 draws conclusions. 2 Constructive Dialogue Model The Constructive Dialogue Model (CDM) is based on the following claims: 1. Dialogue is cooperative negotiation rather than a simple question answer sequence, cf. [14, 6]. 2. Participants are rational, cooperative agents [13] 3. The agent with a need initiates the dialogue [10] 4. The agents push their own goal forward while showing consideration to the partner s goal. 5. The agents exchange new information. 6. Contributions are reactions to the immediately ....
H. H. Clark and D. Wilkes-Gibbs. Referring as a collaborative process. In P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollack, editors, Intentions In Communication, pages 463--493. The MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1990.
....with spoken conversation This paper suggests that direct manipulation (DM) interfaces can be extended by incorporating, via the DM modality itself, interaction techniques that add certain language features associated with spoken conversation. Clark and his colleagues [Clark and Marshall, 1981; Clark and Wilkes Gibbs, 1986] reported that, in humanhuman conversations, the conversants formed mutual beliefs about referents, and that this mutuality extended to the way in which expressions about these referents were generated and understood. Other work [e.g. Lambert and Carberry, 1992] had explored negotiation ....
. Herbert Clark and Deborah Wilkes-Gibbs. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition. 22:1-39, 1986.
No context found.
Clark, H. & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39
No context found.
Clark, H. H., &Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39.
No context found.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39.
No context found.
Clark, H. H. and D. Wilkes-Gibbs. 1986. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1--39.
No context found.
H. H. Clark and D. Wilkes-Gibbs. Referring as a Collaborative Process. Cognition, 22:1-- 39, 1986.
No context found.
Clark, H. & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39
No context found.
Clark, H.H., Wilkes-Gibbs, D.: Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 22 (1986) 1--39
No context found.
Clark, H. & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39 Clark, H. H. & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, R. M.
No context found.
Clark, H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1--39.
No context found.
Clark, H. H. and D. Wilkes-Gibbs, Referring as a collaborative process,in:P.R. Cohen, J. Morgan and M. E. Pollack, editors, Intentions in Communication, MIT, 1990 pp. 463--493.
No context found.
H. H. Clark and D. Wilkes-Gibbs. 1986. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1--39.
No context found.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process.
No context found.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39
No context found.
Clark, H. and Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986) Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1-39.
No context found.
H.H. Clark and D. Wilkes-Gibbs. Referring as a collaborative process. In P.R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M.E. Pollak, editors, Intentions in Communication, pages 463--493. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990.
No context found.
. Clark, H. H., and Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process, Cognition, 22: 1-39.
No context found.
Clark, H. and Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22:1--39.
No context found.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1-39.
First 50 documents Next 50
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC