Mixed-initiative interaction

Summary Research in mixed-initiative interactionis still in its inf ancy, and the r esearch prob-lems we will face are significant. The po-tential impact of suc h systems, however,cannot be o verestimated. If we are ever tobuild computer systems tha t can seamlessl yinteract with humans as the y perform com-plex tasks, these systems will need to sup -port effective mixed-initiative interaction. References 1. J. Allen et al., “A Robust System f or NaturalSpoken Dialo g,”Proc. 31st Meeting ACL,MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1996, pp.62–70.2. G. Ferguson, J. Allen, and B. Miller,“TRAINS-95:Towards a Mixed-InitiativePlanning Assistant,”Proc. Third Conf. AIPlanning Systems (AIPS-96) , AAAI Press,Menlo Park, Calif., 1996, pp. 70–773. G. Ferguson and J . Allen, “TRIPS:An Inte-grated Intellig ent Problem-Solving Assis-tant,”Proc. Nat’l Conf. AI (AAAI-98),AAAI Press, Menlo Park, Calif., 1998.4. J. Allen, J. Hendler, and A. Tate, Readingsin Planning , Morgan Kaufmann, San Fran-cisco, 1990. 16 IEEE INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS

[1]  Morena Danieli,et al.  Metrics for Evaluating Dialogue Strategies in a Spoken Language System , 1996, ArXiv.

[2]  Jean Carletta,et al.  Assessing Agreement on Classification Tasks: The Kappa Statistic , 1996, CL.

[3]  Robert D. Rodman,et al.  The effects of restricted vocabulary size on voice interactive discourse structure , 1988 .

[4]  Lenhart K. Schubert,et al.  Planning in Complex Worlds via Mixed-Initiative Interaction , 1997 .

[5]  Johanna D. Moore,et al.  An Empirical Investigation of Proposals in Collaborative Dialogues , 1998, ACL.

[6]  Chung Hee Hwang,et al.  The TRAINS project: a case study in building a conversational planning agent , 1994, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[7]  Gwyneth Doherty-Sneddon,et al.  The Reliability of a Dialogue Structure Coding Scheme , 1997, CL.

[8]  E. Maier,et al.  Dialogue Acts in VERBMOBIL , 1995 .

[9]  Rebecca J. Passonneau,et al.  Discourse Segmentation by Human and Automated Means , 1997, CL.

[10]  S. Condon,et al.  Functional comparisons of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions , 1996 .

[11]  Marilyn A. Walker,et al.  Evaluating spoken dialogue agents with PARADISE: Two case studies , 1998, Comput. Speech Lang..

[12]  David R. Traum,et al.  Book Reviews: Spoken Natural Language Dialogue Systems: A Practical Approach , 1996, CL.

[13]  CarlettaJean.  Assessing agreement on classification tasks , 1996 .

[14]  Marilyn A. Walker,et al.  The Effect of Resource Limits and Task Complexity on Collaborative Planning in Dialogue , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Jean Carletta,et al.  Planning to Fail, Not Failing to Plan: Risk-Taking and Recovery in Task-Oriented Dialogue , 1992, COLING.

[16]  R. Power.  The organisation of purposeful dialogues , 1979 .