1. Year 3 Plans: A first approximation 10/16/2009SUBTLE Year 2 Overview 1

2. 10/16/2009SUBTLE Year 2 Overview 2 Original Schedule of Deliverables WP:Working paper Alg:Algorithm Corp:Corpus Demo:Demonstration Int DemoIntegrated demonstration Rep:SUBTLE report

3. Summary of progress  Crucial Steps Forward Architecture evolving as components connect —LTL  PAR —Pragmatics  Robot’s expectations Pragbot 2 functioning Two grad students to strong faculty positions, with continued involvement (1 undergrad to HCI PhD program) Situated Understanding Workshop building community  Where behind Just beginning to gather data Factorie is crucial for progress  Pieces about to come together 10/16/2009SUBTLE Year 2 Overview 3

4. Joint Inference PAR + LTL Evolution of Framework Parsing World Model Semantics Pragmatics Parse tree, indices, semantic tags Underspecified predicate logic Graphics/ Human Simulation Robotics Linguistics Natural Language Processing Machine Learning 10/16/2009 4SUBTLE Year 2 Overview

5. PAR + LTL Year 3 Goal Parsing World Model Semantics Pragmatics Parse tree, indices, semantic tags Underspecified predicate logic Graphics/ Human Simulation Robotics Linguistics Natural Language Processing Machine Learning 10/16/2009 5SUBTLE Year 2 Overview

6. Year 3: Crucial Goals Corpus Collection Collect large (hundreds) of game transcripts for Analysis of linguistic phenomena in this domain Connection of Pragmatics to Language Processing Port pragmatics encoded in probabilistic markov logic to Factorie, expand to full NLP Pragbot scenario Integration of LTL+PAR as representational framework for NL semantics & pragmatics, robot Integration of state summarization with NL Result: End to end capability 10/16/2009 6SUBTLE Year 2 Overview

7. Year 3: Pragmatics 1.Required: Fuller integration of general pragmatic pressures with lexical information. 2.Required: Weight setting and evaluation with real users. 3.Additional experiments on resolving underspecification, using the richer Pragbot 2.0 environment for data collection. 4.Additional experiments using explicit and implicit prosody to infer what the presumed QUD structure is like. 5.Richer modeling of intermediate QUDs in task oriented dialogue. 10/16/2009SUBTLE Year 2 Overview 7

8.  Required: MetaPARs: High level PARs directly from NL semantics, pragmatics, with LTL as output  Required: Integration with UMass Lowell  Projective locative prepositions – ‘to the right of’, ‘in front’… 8 Year 3: Extensions of LTL framework

9. Year 3: Looking Forward  Penn– Experiments with incremental rapid parsing  UMass Amherst– Experiments with joint inference across syntax, semantics, pragmatics  George Mason– Extending notion of roles with groups to work with group goals  Penn – Increased understanding of spatial terms 10/16/2009SUBTLE Year 2 Overview 9