utt38 u: and take the people there to delta utt39 s: alright utt40 u: that looks good utt41 s: no problem utt42 u: Delta bridge is out utt43 s: the highlighted actions may need to be revisedIt seems like TRIPS has bags of supposedly equalivalent utterances ("done","your wish is my command", "okay") and ("I didn't understand", "Pardon me?") which I labeled somewhat differently. I labeled "your wish is my command" as a statment but it is idiomatic and I probably shouldn't have. "done" I labeled as statement but not accept or acknowledge. I think it is truly different than "okay" or "alright" which can happen before the action is performed. I also think the acceptance and acknowledgment in "done" is implicit. I labeled "Pardon me?" as an information request since it means "please repeat yourself". One could say the same thing about "I didn't understand" but I didn't feel that way as I could imagine the TRIPS system happily never understanding what you last said. Treating "Pardon me?" as a question sets off one of the dat warnings as it expects an assert as an answer. It would be nice to fix that.
Mystery of Utterances 63 through 69
T54 utt63 U: WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE T55 utt64 S: There are 2 groups-of-people at Delta T56 utt65 U: WHERE ARE ALL THE PEOPLE T57 utt66 S: There are 6 groups-of-people at Delta and 1 at South Delta T58 utt67 U: USE THE HELICOPTER | utt68 U: TO GET THE PEOPLE FROM SOUTH_DELTA TO DELTA T59 utt69 S: There are no people at South Delta T60 utt70 U: USE THE HELICOPTER TO GET THE PEOPLE AT SOUTH_DELTA TO DELTA T61 utt71 S: Your wish is my command
My best guess: definite reference for THE PEOPLE in utt63 is wrong. It gets mapped to the lastest truckload of people which is 2 groups. ALL clarifies things and we get all 6. Utt63 is interpreted as "where are the people we just dropped off?". Utt67 and utt68 are interpreted as referrering to something like the people orginally from south_delta (none). The generator unfortunately chooses to express this by saying "at south delta". PEOPLE AT SOUTH_DELTA is resolved correctly to the people currently there.
Comments on Individual Utterances
1 S: Welcome to trips 97 version 3 point 2.
2 I'm ready to start.
M - open option - let's start
C - task-man or comm-man? manual gives TM precedence
3 U: HELLO
4 S: Hi
M - no backward function for greetings
5 U: SHOW_ME A MAP OF PACIFICA
M - showing map is answer
C - initially marked as IR, revised later
6 S: Ok
7 U: CLEAR [CLEAR should be: WHERE ARE] THE PEOPLE
8 S: I'm afraid I didn't understand you.
D - implicitly asking the speaker to repeat?
M - indirect question?
9 U: WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE
10 S: There are 2 groups-of-people at Exodus, 2 at Calypso, 2 at Barnacle
and 1 at Abyss
A - I don't like coding all answers as acknowledging, but I feel I have no
choice --- you say all accepts also acknowledge
11 U: WHERE ARE THE TRANSPORTS
12 S: There are 2 trucks and 1 helicopter at Delta
D - not open option because the speaker is not suggesting potential
actions.
13 U: USE A TRUCK [missed: TO] GET THE PEOPLE FROM CALYPSO
14 TO DELTA
E - In Verbmobil, we perfer functional prosodic segmentation instead
of auditory prosodic features to get rid of such boundaries
15 S: Ok
B - ok, yes here often got an agreement tag because system seems to
confirm not only message understanding (like in maptask or verbmobil) but also
performance of the action
16 U: IT [IT mistakenly inserted] HOW_LONG WILL A [A should be THAT] TAKE
17 S: I'm afraid I didn't understand you.
D - Not clear if it is a hold. The first question in the agreement
decision tree is hard to answer.
18 U: HOW_LONG
19 WILL THAT TAKE
20 S: It will take 6 hours and 54 minutes
21 U: WHAT IF WE WENT ALONG [missed: THE] COAST INSTEAD
D - If this were two people planning together, I would say open option.
But here it looks like the user is just trying to get more information.
C - no influence-on-S even if plural subject, just an idiom
22 S: I'm sorry, but that input didn't make sense to me.
A - unclear whether S sees utt19 as open-option, so somewhat strange to code as
"hold" --- I suppose coding from human perspective?
23 U: WHAT IF WE WENT ALONG THE COAST INSTEAD
M - open-option, unaddressed by 24, dat warning comes up, yuck
24 S: That option would take 8 hours and 52 minutes
A - unclear if S sees utt21 as open-option or straight info-request
25 U: I [I mistakenly inserted] FORGET IT
C - assert, not influence-on-L, because of "I"
26 S: Ok
C - no influence-on-S because of antecedent
27 U: USE THE OTHER TRUCK [missed: TO] GET THE PEOPLE AT EXODUS TO
DELTA
D - Was the 6 hours 54 minutes implicitly accepted when the 8 hours
52 minutes was rejected?
28 S: Ok
29 U: LET'S USE A HELICOPTER INSTEAD
C - no "influence-on-S" because actions are of "s"
30 S: Alright
31 U: NOW SEND TRUCK ONE
32 TO BARNACLE
33 S: I'll get right on it
34 U: PICK UP THE PEOPLE THERE
35 S: Ok
36 U: GO ON TO ABYSS
37 S: Your wish is my command
D - This and "I'll get right on it" are really just like "ok" coming
from this machine, but I tagged them differently.
38 U: AND TAKE THE PEOPLE THERE TO DELTA
39 S: Alright
40 U: THAT LOOKS GOOD
41 S: No problem
A - not sure what system means; take as confirming plan works
C - not quite sure what utt41 does
D - acknowledgements that are not accepts are usually communication
management.
42 U: DELTA_BRIDGE IS OUT
F - i need to know more about task to label this correctly
43 S: The highlighted actions may need to be revised.
F - i need to know more about task to label this correctly
C - could it be TM? could it be act-Dir and/or Offer? would need info-rel as well
44 Ok
F - can't label this without knowing more about the task
D - This "ok" doesn't seem to be well-formed. I'm assuming that it
is a signal understanding that would have sounded better if it came before
utterance 44.
B - s maintains the turn by uttering ok
C - not sure about function of this OK
A - don't understand why S says OK here. Ready to listen again?
M - accept knowledge of 42
45 U: SEND_A [A mistakenly inserted] TRUCK TWO
46 ALONG THE COAST INSTEAD
47 S: Sorry, I don't know how to do that.
C - interpreted as "I can't comply" instead of "I don't understand"
48 U: SEND TRUCK TWO
49 ALONG THE COAST INSTEAD
50 S: Done
C - uncertain about commit because action already done
51 U: HAVE THE OTHER TRUCK STOP AT SOUTH_DELTA INSTEAD
52 S: Alright
53 U: UNLOAD A [A should be THE] PEOPLE
54 S: Pardon me?
D - responses to directives usually have an agreement feature
C - comment=performative because equivalent to "sorry" (???)
55 U: UNLOAD
56 THE PEOPLE
57 S: Fine
C - comment=different from "ok, alright" as statement?
58 U: USE THE HELICOPTER [missed TO] GET THE PEOPLE FROM SOUTH_DELTA TO DELTA
59 S: Alright
60 U: WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE
61 LEFT [LEFT mistakenly inserted]
62 S: I don't understand your reference to the people left
D - I thought I saw somewhere in the manual that "I don't know" is
a reject because it's like saying I can't open the door because
my arm is broken.
63 U: WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE
64 S: There are 2 groups-of-people at Delta
65 U: WHERE ARE ALL THE PEOPLE
66 S: There are 6 groups-of-people at Delta and 1 at South Delta
67 U: USE THE HELICOPTER
68 TO GET THE PEOPLE FROM SOUTH_DELTA TO DELTA
69 S: There are no people at South Delta
C - don't understand utt69 see 66
A - could be hold, not reject; submissive systems don't ever reject plans
but point up flaws.
M - misunderstanding, but system doesn't know. can we mark this separately
from signal non-understanding
70 U: USE THE HELICOPTER TO GET THE PEOPLE AT SOUTH_DELTA TO DELTA
71 S: Your wish is my command
72 U: [user selects simulate plan from a menu]
F - how to label this?
D - no verbal action/ no tags
C - should it be "commit"? but actions are of the system
73 S: Simulation succeeded in 94 percent of 250 runs.
C - comment=should it be accept? no, don't think so (see discussion about
"done" in utt50)
74 7 percent of the plan failure points were a move action with
truck two resulting in a breakdown.
Last change: 05 May 98 by mcore
Click here to send in comments or questions.
Back to the Dialog Annotation Page