Implicatures and Nested Beliefs in Approximate Decentralized-POMDPs

Conversational implicatures involve reasoning about multiply nested belief structures. This complexity poses significant challenges for computational models of conversation and cognition. We show that agents in the multi-agent DecentralizedPOMDP reach implicature-rich interpretations simply as a by-product of the way they reason about each other to maximize joint utility. Our simulations involve a reference game of the sort studied in psychology and linguistics as well as a dynamic, interactional scenario involving implemented artificial agents.

[1]  Laurence R. Horn,et al.  On the semantic properties of logical operators in english' reproduced by the indiana university lin , 1972 .

[2]  Eve V. Clark,et al.  The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. , 1987 .

[3]  N. Arnett.  Goal-driven Answers in the Cards Dialogue Corpus , 2012 .

[4]  Paul Portner,et al.  Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning , 2011 .

[5]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  Game theory in semantics and pragmatics , 2012 .

[6]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Ad-hoc scalar implicature in adults and children , 2011, CogSci.

[7]  Michael Franke,et al.  Signal to act : game theory in pragmatics , 2009 .

[8]  Roger Levy,et al.  That's what she (could have) said: How alternative utterances affect language use , 2012, CogSci.

[9]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  Chapter 7: Game Dynamics Connects Semantics And Pragmatics , 2007 .

[10]  Julia Hirschberg,et al.  A theory of scalar implicature , 1985 .

[11]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Predicting Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Games , 2012, Science.

[12]  Prashant Doshi,et al.  Monte Carlo Sampling Methods for Approximating Interactive POMDPs , 2014, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[13]  Colin Camerer,et al.  A Cognitive Hierarchy Model of Games , 2004 .

[14]  Philip R. Cohen,et al.  Referring as a Collaborative Process , 2003 .

[15]  G. Jäger,et al.  Game dynamics connects semantics and pragmatics , 2022 .

[16]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Using Speakers ’ Referential Intentions to Model Early Cross-Situational Word Learning , 2022 .

[17]  P. J. Gmytrasiewicz,et al.  A Framework for Sequential Planning in Multi-Agent Settings , 2005, AI&M.

[18]  Seymour Rosenberg,et al.  Speakers' and Listeners' Processes in a Word-Communication Task , 1964, Science.

[19]  Emiel Krahmer,et al.  Computational Generation of Referring Expressions: A Survey , 2012, CL.

[20]  Dan Klein,et al.  A Game-Theoretic Approach to Generating Spatial Descriptions , 2010, EMNLP.

[21]  David DeVault,et al.  Managing ambiguities across utterances in dialogue , 2007 .

[22]  Nikos A. Vlassis,et al.  Perseus: Randomized Point-based Value Iteration for POMDPs , 2005, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[23]  Michael Franke,et al.  Optimal Reasoning About Referential Expressions , 2012 .

[24]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form , 1978 .

[25]  Siobhan Chapman.  Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[26]  Robert Dale,et al.  Computational Interpretations of the Gricean Maxims in the Generation of Referring Expressions , 1995, Cogn. Sci..

[27]  Neil Immerman,et al.  The Complexity of Decentralized Control of Markov Decision Processes , 2000, UAI.

[28]  Christopher Potts,et al.  Goal-Driven Answers in the CardsDialogue Corpus , 2012 .

[29]  Christopher Potts,et al.  Emergence of Gricean Maxims from Multi-Agent Decision Theory , 2013, NAACL.

[30]  Brady Clark,et al.  Communicating with Cost-based Implicature: a Game-Theoretic Approach to Ambiguity , 2012 .