In this paper some a pplications of a theory for r epresentation and inference in multimodal scenarios is presented. The theory is focused on the relation between natural language a nd graphical expressions. A basic assumption is that graphical expressions belong to a language with well-defined syntax and semantics: a graphical l anguage. A second assumption is that the relation between expressions of different modalities is similar to the relation of translation that holds between expressions of different natural languages. In this paper a multimodal system of representation and inference based o n this view of modality is described. First, a brief introduction to the representational structures of the multimodal system is presented. Then, a number of multimodal inferences s upported b y the system are illustrated. These e xamples show how the multimodal system of representation can support t he definition and u se of graphical languages, perceptual inferences for problem-solving and interpretation of multimodal messages. Finally, the intuitive notion of modality underlying this research is discussed. 1. Multimodal Representation The system of multimodal representation that is s ummarized in this paper is illustrated in Figure 1. The notion of modality in which the system is based is a representational notion: information conveyed in one particular modality is expressed in a representational l anguage a ssociated with the modality. Each modality in the system is captured through a particular language, and relations between expressions of different modalities are captured in terms of translation functions from basic and composite expressions of the source modality into expressions of the object modality. This view of multimodal representation and reasoning h as been developed in [13], [17], [9], [18] and [19], and it follows closely the spirit of Montague’s general semiotic programme [5].
[1]
Luis Alberto Pineda,et al.
A Model for Multimodal Reference Resolution
,
2000,
Computational Linguistics.
[2]
Uwe Reyle,et al.
From discourse to logic
,
1993
.
[3]
Alan Borning,et al.
The Programming Language Aspects of ThingLab, a Constraint-Oriented Simulation Laboratory
,
1981,
TOPL.
[4]
Steve Howard,et al.
Human-Computer Interaction INTERACT ’97
,
1997,
IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing.
[5]
Ewan Klein,et al.
GRAFLOG: Understanding Drawings through Natural Language
,
1988,
Comput. Graph. Forum.
[6]
Luis A. Pineda,et al.
Synthesis of solid models of polyhedra from their orthogonal views using logical representations
,
1998
.
[7]
John Lyons,et al.
Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics
,
1971
.
[8]
Balakrishnan Chandrasekaran,et al.
Diagrammatic Representation and Reasoning: Some Distinctions
,
1997
.
[9]
David R. Dowty,et al.
Introduction to Montague semantics
,
1980
.
[10]
Luias Apineda.
On computational models of drafting and design
,
1993
.
[11]
Wm Leler,et al.
Constraint programming languages
,
1987
.
[12]
Ewan Klein,et al.
Semantics and graphical information
,
1990,
INTERACT.
[13]
Luis Alberto Pineda.
Reference, Synthesis and Constraint Satisfaction *
,
1992,
Comput. Graph. Forum.
[14]
Luis Alberto Pineda Cortes.
Graflog: a theory of semantics for graphics with applications to human-computer interaction and cad systems
,
1989
.
[15]
Osvaldo Cairó.
KAMET: A comprehensive methodology for knowledge acquisition from multiple knowledge sources
,
1998
.
[16]
Raymond Reiter,et al.
The Logic of Depiction
,
1987
.
[17]
Luis A. Pineda,et al.
Graphical and linguistic dialogue for intelligent multimodal systems
,
1998
.