Computational Models of Discourse Analysis

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Computational Models of Discourse Analysis Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Advertisements

Computational Models of Discourse Analysis Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Philosophy of Research
Predictive Evaluation
1 EDTE 316 Science Methods Fall 2007 Module 3 (Weeks 5, 6 & 7) To properly navigate through this PowerPoint, go to “View” and click on “Slide Show”
Making Group Work Productive PowerPoints available at Click on “Resources”
Session 3 / Adolescent Literacy January Teaching Inductively.
By Alice Omaggio Hadley
Semi-supervised Dialogue Act Recognition Maryam Tavafi.
Using edTPA Data for Program Design and Curriculum Mapping Mary Ariail, Georgia State University Kristy Brown, Shorter University Judith Emerson, Georgia.
Math 010 online work that was due today at the start of class: Gateway Homework #2 (turn in worksheet now, while I take roll) Section 1.4/1.5 Online Homework.
Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute and Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Machine Learning in Practice Lecture 5 Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Computational Models of Discourse Analysis Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Outline of Today’s Discussion 1.The Chi-Square Test of Independence 2.The Chi-Square Test of Goodness of Fit.
Computational Models of Discourse Analysis Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Computational Models of Discourse Analysis Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
INF oktober Conversations and interviews INF October 2005.
HCI Meeting 1 Thursday, August 26. Class Activities [1] Student questionnaire Answer the following questions: 1.When and where was the computer mouse.
Machine Learning in Practice Lecture 10 Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Computational Models of Discourse Analysis Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Machine Learning in Practice Lecture 9 Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Machine Learning in Practice Lecture 9 Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Unit 3 Learning Styles Learning Styles Study Styles LASSI Discussion Assignment Seminar.
Careers in law and justice and Employability Skills.
CSc 120 Introduction to Computer Programing II
NEFLIN Assessment Basics for Library Instruction
COMMUNICATION OF MEANING
Today Preview of Fieldnotes 2 (due 11/17) Peer review of Fieldnotes1
Internationalizing the Curriculum: Faculty Development Workshop
Qualitative Data Analysis
Exploring Teacher’s Beliefs about Teaching ESL:
Prepared by Arabella Volkov
Diana Skrzydlo and Nam-Hwui Kim
Study Guide Research Methods in Nursing (NSC 440) By
English 1301 Joe Dornich.
22. Form-Focused Instruction
CS101 Introduction to Computing Lecture 24 Design Heuristics
Monday.
Implementing the NHS KSF Action Planning and Surgery Session
OVERVIEW OF DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
What to Look for Mathematics Grade 4
We’ll be spending minutes talking about Quiz 1 that you’ll be taking at the next class session before you take the Gateway Quiz today.
Defect Analysis: Memory Leaks
English How to study.
What to Look for Mathematics Grade 6
What to Look for Mathematics Grade 7
EDU 675 STUDY Lessons in Excellence-- edu675study.com.
EDU 675 STUDY Education for Service-- edu675study.com.
Writing to Learn vs. Writing in the Disciplines
Language learning is believed to depend on immersing students not merely in “comprehensive input” but in tasks that require them to negotiate meaning.
CDA 3100 Summer 2013.
homework assignment due Feb 23
UNIT 3 CHAPTER 1 LESSON 4 Using Simple Commands.
Guidelines for Group Projects and Papers
Introduction to CS II Data Structures
Keeping Students on Track Using Technological Retention Tools
Practical Software Engineering
Computational Models of Discourse Analysis
Curriculum Updates Spanish and French
Machine Learning in Practice Lecture 27
Creative assessment and feedback
Computational Models of Discourse Analysis
Psych 231: Research Methods in Psychology
Monday, May 20 Reminders: Final/Semester Exam for everyone this Wednesday, May 22 Last Friday (5-17) - Electricity Unit Test Test and lab make-up is today.
Seeing the classroom as culture: using Open Space and video cameras
Homework Reading Machine Projects Labs
UNIVERSITY TOP 10 Understanding What to Expect as a Future University Student
Debate.
Wrt 205: critical research
Presentation transcript:

Computational Models of Discourse Analysis Carolyn Penstein Rosé Language Technologies Institute/ Human-Computer Interaction Institute

Warm-Up Read the posts and be ready to discuss what you see as the take aways for computationization of discourse analysis from today’s readings… What are the computational implications of the debate between DA and CA? Note: These preparatory activities were rated as least beneficial to students, so… We will start the lecture/discussion at exactly 12:05pm. Please be on time and ready to discuss!

Early Course Evaluation Good news: everyone rated the lectures/discussions as valuable and engaging Things to improve: Decrease preparation time Change: only one discussion thread per week, but continue to use it throughout the week, include different options for response that require different amounts of time Change: frontload readings for Monday, further divide readings into required, extra, and supplemental More focus on fewer concepts for the remainder of the semester

This week: Sections 7.2-7.7 are most important * Not required!!!

Chicken and Egg… Main issue for this week: Exploring sequencing and linking between speech acts in conversation Operationalization Computationalization * Where do the ordering constraints come from? Is it the language? Or is it what is behind the language (e.g., intentions, task structure)? If the latter, how do we computationalize that?

Reminder from last time RE Constraint from Ordering Inform is the most common class (37.4%) Next most frequent is Assess (18.5%) With bigrams, if we look for conditional probabilities above 25% The only case where the most likely next class is not Inform is Elicit-Assessment, which is followed by Assessment 36% of the time It is followed by Inform 33% of the time It only occurs about 1% of the time Trigrams might be better, but this makes ordering information look pretty useless

More on what was least valuable (student quotes) The forum prompt mini-assignments seem unbalanced in proportion to the homework - by the time the "real" homework came along, I felt I had done ten times more work on my posts already. The Homework Nice job on the homeworks!!! I saw SO much improvement over the several posts and finally the assignment.

Assignment 2 (not due til Feb23) Look at the Maptask dataset and Negotiation coding that is provided Think about what distinguishes the codes at a linguistic level Do an error analysis on the dataset using a simple unigram baseline, and from that propose one or a few new types of features motivated by your linguistic understanding of the Negotiation framework Due on Week 7 lecture 2 Turn in data your feature extractors (documented code) and a formal write up of your experimentation Have a 5 minute powerpoint presentation ready for class on Week 7 lecture 2

Interesting Observation! Responses can address either illocutions or perlocutions Perlocutions are much less constrained Accounts for some of the difficulty in imposing ordering constraints Argues in favor for thinking about conversation as organized around intentions and tasks rather than linguistic categories Wednesday’s readings will argue just the opposite!! Are illocutions just the wrong categories??

Discourse Analysis vs Conversation Analysis (according to Levinson) Rules, formulas, more typical of linguistics and philosophers Categories, contingencies, grammars Use of a small but strategic amount of data Accused of “premature” theory construction Martin & Rose, Levinson More rigorously empirical and inductive Focus on what is found in data, not on what is expected to be found or would sound odd Hesitant to make generalizations/ Accused of being atheoretical Questions about whether the rules “work” on real data Do you see a connection with semisupervised learning? * Is it a question about the nature of language (is there a fundamental segmentation difference between utterances and acts?), or is it a question about research methodology? Are these linked?

Qualitative observations, anthrooplogy style Rules, like speech acts The nature of what we are modeling What we can know about it and how certain we can be How we learn what we know Qualitative observations, anthrooplogy style Rules, like speech acts

… An now for Elijah’s SIDE presentation

Questions?