circle Adding Spoken Dialogue to a Text-Based Tutorial Dialogue System Diane J. Litman Learning Research and Development Center & Computer Science Department.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Non-Native Users in the Let s Go!! Spoken Dialogue System: Dealing with Linguistic Mismatch Antoine Raux & Maxine Eskenazi Language Technologies Institute.
Advertisements

Mihai Rotaru Diane J. Litman DoD Group Meeting Presentation
Interactivity. Interactive Engagement TV News vs. Reading Lecture vs. Interactive Engagement TV News vs. Reading Easy Inefficient Have to listen to what.
Detecting Certainness in Spoken Tutorial Dialogues Liscombe, Hirschberg & Venditti Using System and User Performance Features to Improve Emotion Detection.
Uncertainty Corpus: Resource to Study User Affect in Complex Spoken Dialogue Systems Kate Forbes-Riley, Diane Litman, Scott Silliman, Amruta Purandare.
Sorry, I didn’t catch that! – an investigation of non-understandings and recovery strategies Dan Bohuswww.cs.cmu.edu/~dbohus Alexander I. Rudnickywww.cs.cmu.edu/~air.
Combining Prosodic and Text Features for Segmentation of Mandarin Broadcast News Gina-Anne Levow University of Chicago SIGHAN July 25, 2004.
Error detection in spoken dialogue systems GSLT Dialogue Systems, 5p Gabriel Skantze TT Centrum för talteknologi.
Identifying Local Corrections in Human-Computer Dialogue Gina-Anne Levow University of Chicago October 5, 2004.
Spoken Language Technologies: A review of application areas and research issues Analysis and synthesis of F0 contours Agnieszka Wagner Department of Phonetics,
Prosodic Cues to Discourse Segment Boundaries in Human-Computer Dialogue SIGDial 2004 Gina-Anne Levow April 30, 2004.
Detecting missrecognitions Predicting with prosody.
1 Evidence of Emotion Julia Hirschberg
1 error handling – Higgins / Galatea Dialogs on Dialogs Group July 2005.
Error Detection in Human-Machine Interaction Dan Bohus DoD Group, Oct 2002.
HRM-755 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
1 Chapter 19: Dialogue and Conversational Agents Nadia Hamrouni and Ahmed Abbasi 12/5/2006.
Topics = Domain-Specific Concepts Online Physics Encyclopedia ‘Eric Weisstein's World of Physics’ Contains total 3040 terms including multi-word concepts.
Predicting Student Emotions in Computer-Human Tutoring Dialogues Diane J. Litman and Kate Forbes-Riley University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Shriberg, Stolcke, Ang: Prosody for Emotion Detection DARPA ROAR Workshop 11/30/01 1 Liz Shriberg* Andreas Stolcke* Jeremy Ang + * SRI International International.
 Today, we will Conduct an Investigation Take some notes Write a short reflection about what we learned  Please Do Now: get your lab notebook get out.
® Automatic Scoring of Children's Read-Aloud Text Passages and Word Lists Klaus Zechner, John Sabatini and Lei Chen Educational Testing Service.
Modeling User Satisfaction and Student Learning in a Spoken Dialogue Tutoring System with Generic, Tutoring, and User Affect Parameters Kate Forbes-Riley.
Interactive Dialogue Systems Professor Diane Litman Computer Science Department & Learning Research and Development Center University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh,
On Speaker-Specific Prosodic Models for Automatic Dialog Act Segmentation of Multi-Party Meetings Jáchym Kolář 1,2 Elizabeth Shriberg 1,3 Yang Liu 1,4.
Crowdsourcing for Spoken Dialogue System Evaluation Ling 575 Spoken Dialog April 30, 2015.
Adaptive Spoken Dialogue Systems & Computational Linguistics Diane J. Litman Dept. of Computer Science & Learning Research and Development Center University.
Correlations with Learning in Spoken Tutoring Dialogues Diane Litman Learning Research and Development Center and Computer Science Department University.
A Successful Dialogue without Adaptation S: Hi, this is AT&T Amtrak schedule system. This is Toot. How may I help you? U: I want a train from Baltimore.
Notes on Motion VI Free Fall A Special type of uniform acceleration.
Collaborative Research: Monitoring Student State in Tutorial Spoken Dialogue Diane Litman Computer Science Department and Learning Research and Development.
1 Natural Language Processing Lecture Notes 14 Chapter 19.
1 Computation Approaches to Emotional Speech Julia Hirschberg
Predicting Student Emotions in Computer-Human Tutoring Dialogues Diane J. Litman&Kate Forbes-Riley University of Pittsburgh Department of Computer Science.
Why predict emotions? Feature granularity levels [1] uses pitch features computed at the word-level Offers a better approximation of the pitch contour.
Using Word-level Features to Better Predict Student Emotions during Spoken Tutoring Dialogues Mihai Rotaru Diane J. Litman Graduate Research Competition.
Notes on Motion VI Free Fall A Special type of uniform acceleration.
Ahhh! I’m falling Free Fall and Physics. Free Fall 3 IMPORTANT things to remember – We are ignoring fiction. – The object’s mass or shape doesn’t matter.
Speech and Language Processing for Educational Applications Professor Diane Litman Computer Science Department & Intelligent Systems Program & Learning.
Building & Evaluating Spoken Dialogue Systems Discourse & Dialogue CS 359 November 27, 2001.
Spoken Dialog Systems Diane J. Litman Professor, Computer Science Department.
Experiences with Undergraduate Research (Natural Language Processing for Educational Applications) Professor Diane Litman University of Pittsburgh.
User Responses to Prosodic Variation in Fragmentary Grounding Utterances in Dialog Gabriel Skantze, David House & Jens Edlund.
Using Prosody to Recognize Student Emotions and Attitudes in Spoken Tutoring Dialogues Diane Litman Department of Computer Science and Learning Research.
Misrecognitions and Corrections in Spoken Dialogue Systems Diane Litman AT&T Labs -- Research (Joint Work With Julia Hirschberg, AT&T, and Marc Swerts,
(Speech and Affect in Intelligent Tutoring) Spoken Dialogue Systems Diane Litman Computer Science Department and Learning Research and Development Center.
Metacognition and Learning in Spoken Dialogue Computer Tutoring Kate Forbes-Riley and Diane Litman Learning Research and Development Center University.
circle Spoken Dialogue for the Why2 Intelligent Tutoring System Diane J. Litman Learning Research and Development Center & Computer Science Department.
1 Spoken Dialogue Systems Error Detection and Correction in Spoken Dialogue Systems.
circle Towards Spoken Dialogue Systems for Tutorial Applications Diane Litman Reprise of LRDC Board of Visitors Meeting, April 2003.
Improving (Meta)cognitive Tutoring by Detecting and Responding to Uncertainty Diane Litman & Kate Forbes-Riley University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA.
Designing and Evaluating Two Adaptive Spoken Dialogue Systems Diane J. Litman* University of Pittsburgh Dept. of Computer Science & LRDC
Experiments with ITSPOKE: An Intelligent Tutoring Spoken Dialogue System Diane Litman Computer Science Department and Learning Research and Development.
Acoustic Cues to Emotional Speech Julia Hirschberg (joint work with Jennifer Venditti and Jackson Liscombe) Columbia University 26 June 2003.
Speed, Velocity, and Acceleration SPH3U UNIT 1: KINEMATICS.
Using Natural Language Processing to Analyze Tutorial Dialogue Corpora Across Domains and Modalities Diane Litman, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh,
5.6 Projectiles Launched at an Angle. No matter the angle at which a projectile is launched, the vertical distance of fall beneath the idealized straight-line.
Detecting and Adapting to Student Uncertainty in a Spoken Tutorial Dialogue System Diane Litman Computer Science Department & Learning Research & Development.
Prosodic Cues to Disengagement and Uncertainty in Physics Tutorial Dialogues Diane Litman, Heather Friedberg, Kate Forbes-Riley University of Pittsburgh.
Predicting and Adapting to Poor Speech Recognition in a Spoken Dialogue System Diane J. Litman AT&T Labs -- Research
Predicting Emotion in Spoken Dialogue from Multiple Knowledge Sources Kate Forbes-Riley and Diane Litman Learning Research and Development Center and Computer.
Towards Emotion Prediction in Spoken Tutoring Dialogues
Dialogue-Learning Correlations in Spoken Dialogue Tutoring
Error Detection and Correction in SDS
Issues in Spoken Dialogue Systems
Spoken Dialogue Systems
Spoken Dialogue Systems
Liz Shriberg* Andreas Stolcke* Jeremy Ang+ * SRI International
Vertical Motion Problems
Spoken Dialogue Systems
Presentation transcript:

circle Adding Spoken Dialogue to a Text-Based Tutorial Dialogue System Diane J. Litman Learning Research and Development Center & Computer Science Department University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA USA

circle Why Spoken Dialogue Tutoring? Motivation –Promote learning gains by enhancing communication richness Benefits for Intelligent Tutoring Systems –Naturalness and ease of use –New sources of evidence regarding dialogue and pedagogy –Complement to current talking heads –Hands-free aspect can support multimodal interaction Benefits for Spoken Dialogue Systems –Tutoring is a challenging and largely unexplored application

circle Research Questions What are the advantages – and disadvantages – of using speech over text? Can prosody be used to infer pedagogically significant information? Can the tutoring system make use of such inferences? Testbed - Why2: an existing University of Pittsburgh text-based dialogue tutoring system

circle Why2-Atlas screen shot 4. A rock is thrown straight upward with a velocity v. What is its acceleration at the top of its path? What is its velocity when it comes back to the starting point? Why? At the very top of the path, where the velocity is equal to 0, the acceleration will be -9.8 m/(s*s), the acceleration of gravity. It will no longer have any upward acceleration. When it comes back the its starting point (assuming that it is the ground) its velocity will be equal to 0 because its downward progress will be stopped by the ground Tutor: What is the velocity just before it hits the ground? Student: That will depend on the time that the ball is in the air/distance ball traveled. Tutor: How will it compare with the velocity with which it was thrown up? They will be equal.The height the ball reaches will depend on the initial velocity

circle Recall Previous Work Prediction of dialogue and utterance level problems –Automatically computable features (prosody, ASR, history, efficiency, quality, lexical) can accurately predict annotated turn classes (misrecognitions - 93%; aware sites - 89%; corrections -84%) –Prosodic features include pitch, energy, duration, pause, tempo, and silence Adaptation –Task success improved from 23% to 65% by detecting and reacting to problematic subdialogues

circle Example with Annotations S: Hi, this is AT&T Amtrak schedule system. This is TOOT. How may I help you? U: I'd like to find a train from Ch- to Chicago from Baltimore. MISRECOGNITION S: Sorry, I can't understand you. Please repeat your utterance. U: I'd like to find a train from Baltimore to Chicago. AWARE, CORRECTION

circle Implications for Tutorial Dialogue Hypothesis –Similar features will prove useful for predicting and adapting to problematic pedagogical situations Challenge –What pedagogical situations should (and can) be annotated? Starting Points –“Tutorial-level misrecognitions” (e.g., a correct student answer is understood to be incorrect by the system) –Problematic affective states (e.g., confusion, boredom, anger, frustration [Evens 2002]) –Off-talk, subjective language –Initiative (e.g., papers in this session) –Dialogue acts / discourse structure

circle Emotion and Prosody (Shriberg et al. 2001) u Neutral –July 30 –Yes u Disappointed/tired –No u Amused/surprised –No u Annoyed –Yes –Late morning (HYP) u Frustrated –Yes –No –No, I am … (HYP) –There is no Manila

circle Status About to start a “wizard” study to collect corpus of human- human, spoken tutoring dialogues Implementation of human-computer system in progress Lots of opportunities for manual and automated dialogue annotation, analysis via machine learning, and incorporation of insights back into the system

circle Summary Adding spoken dialogue to tutoring systems provides both opportunities and challenges Expected Contributions –Empirical comparisons with text-based tutoring dialogue systems –Annotation schemes for dialogue states of potential pedagogical interest –Use of prosodic and other features to predict such states –Exploitation of such predictions by the tutoring system

circle Example with Annotations S: Hi, this is AT&T Amtrak schedule system. This is TOOT. How may I help you? U: I'd like to find a train from Ch- to Chicago from Baltimore. MISRECOGNITION S: Sorry, I can't understand you. Please repeat your utterance. U: I'd like to find a train from Baltimore to Chicago. MISRECOGNITION, AWARE, CORRECTION S: I heard you say “leave today around 5 thirty in the morning." Which city do you want to go to? U: I would like to leave Saturday at eight in the morning. MISRECOGNITION, AWARE, CORRECTION S: You can say the arrival city name, such as “New York City." U: Baltimore to Chicago.AWARE, CORRECTION