Responding Intelligently to Unparsable Inputs

All natural language systems are likely to receive inputs for which they are unprepared. The system must be able to respond to such inputs by explicitly indicating the reasons the input could not be understood, so that the user will have precise information for trying to rephrase the input. If natural language communication to data bases, to expert consultant systems, or to any other practical system is to be accepted by other than computer personnel, this is an absolute necessity.This paper presents several ideas for dealing with parts of this broad problem. One is the use of presupposition to detect user assumptions. The second is relaxation of tests while parsing. The third is a general technique for responding intelligently when no parse can be found. All of these ideas have been implemented and tested in one of two natural language systems. Some of the ideas are heuristics that might be employed by humans; others are engineering solutions for the problem of practical natural language systems.

[1]  Daniel G. Bobrow,et al.  GUS, A Frame-Driven Dialog System , 1986, Artif. Intell..

[2]  S. Jerrold Kaplan.  Indirect responses to loaded questions , 1978, TINLAP '78.

[3]  William A. Woods,et al.  Progress in natural language understanding: an application to lunar geology , 1973, AFIPS National Computer Conference.

[4]  Ralph Mark Weischedel.  Computation of a unique class of inferences: presupposition and entailment. , 1975 .

[5]  George E. Heidorn.  Augmented phrase structure grammars , 1975, TINLAP '75.

[6]  William A. Woods,et al.  Computational Linguistics Transition Network Grammars for Natural Language Analysis , 2022 .

[7]  Norman K. Sondheimer,et al.  Ungrammaticality and Extra-Grammaticality in Natural Language Understanding Systems , 1979, ACL.

[8]  Aravind K. Joshi,et al.  Computation Of A Subclass Of Inferences: Presupposition And Entailment , 1979, ACL Microfiche Series 1-83, Including Computational Linguistics.

[9]  E. F. Codd,et al.  RENDEZVOUS Version 1: An Experimental English Language Query Formulation System for Casual Users of Relational Data Bases , 1978, Research Report / RJ / IBM / San Jose, California.

[10]  Gary G. Hendrix.  Human Engineering for Applied Natural Language Processing , 1977, IJCAI.

[11]  C. Raymond Perrault,et al.  Elements of a Plan-Based Theory of Speech Acts , 1979, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  Samuel Jerrold Kaplan,et al.  Cooperative responses from a portable natural language data base query system. , 1979 .

[13]  John Seely Brown,et al.  MULTIPLE REPRESENTATIONS OF KNOWLEDGE FOR TUTORIAL REASONING , 1975 .

[14]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding natural language , 1974 .

[15]  Gary G. Herdrix.  Human engineering fcr applied natural language processing , 1977, IJCAI 1977.

[16]  Ralph Grishman.  Implementation of the string parser of English , 1973 .

[17]  H. H. Clark,et al.  What's new? Acquiring New information as a process in comprehension , 1974 .

[18]  Philip J. Hayes,et al.  An anatomy of graceful interaction in spoken and written man-machine communication , 1979 .

[19]  Gary G. Hendrix,et al.  Developing a natural language interface to complex data , 1977, TODS.

[20]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  Artificial Intelligence , 1974, IFIP Congress.

[21]  James F. Allen.  A plan-based approach to speech act recognition , 1979 .

[22]  Mark James,et al.  An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Language Instruction , 1978, Artif. Intell..

[23]  James A. Moore,et al.  Dialogue-Games: Metacommunication Structures for Natural Language Interaction , 1977, Cogn. Sci..

[24]  H. William Buttelmann,et al.  American Journal of Computational Linguistics , 1974 .