Finding Appropriate Interaction Strategies for Proactive Dialogue Systems—An Open Quest

Florian Nothdurft
Institute of Communications Engineering, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

Stefan Ultes
Institute of Communications Engineering, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

Wolfgang Minker
Institute of Communications Engineering, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

Ladda ner artikel

Ingår i: Proceedings of the 2nd European and the 5th Nordic Symposium on Multimodal Communication, August 6-8, 2014, Tartu, Estonia

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 110:10, s. 73-80

Visa mer +

Publicerad: 2015-05-26

ISBN: 978-91-7519-074-7

ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)


In this paper we elucidate the challenges of proactiveness in dialogue systems and how these influence the effectiveness of turn-taking behaviour in multimodal as well as in unimodal di- alogue systems. Effective turn-taking is essential for a natural and qualitatively high human- computer interaction. Especially in spoken dialogue systems, analysing whether the dialogue system should or could take the floor, seems to be an important process in the overall perceived quality of the interaction. Additionally, as technical systems get increasingly complex and evolve in the direction of intelligent assistants rather than simple problem solvers, proactive system be- haviour may influence the perception of the ongoing dialogue between human and computer. Autonomously made decisions or triggered system actions may surprise or even disturb the user, which may result in a reduced transparency of the technical system. Therefore, the decision if, when and how to take the floor in a proactive system yields additional challenges. We discuss each layer of decision-making and explain how multimodal cognitive systems can help to control this decision-making in a valuable fashion.


Inga nyckelord är tillgängliga


Susanne Biundo, Pascal Bercher, Thomas Geier, Felix Mller, and Bernd Schattenberg. 2011. Advanced user assistance based on ai planning. Cognitive Systems Research, 12(34):219 – 236. Special Issue on Complex Cognition.

Sidney D’Mello and Jacqueline Kory. 2012. Consistent but modest: a meta-analysis on unimodal and multimodal affect detection accuracies from 30 studies. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM international conference on Multimodal interaction, pages 31–38. ACM.

Starkey Duncan. 1972. Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23:283–292.

Agust´in Gravano and Julia Hirschberg. 2011. Turn-taking cues in task-oriented dialogue. Comput. Speech Lang., 25(3):601–634, July.

Frank Honold, Pascal Bercher, Felix Richter, Florian Nothdurft, Thomas Geier, Roland Barth, Thilo Hoernle, Felix Schüssel, Stephan Reuter, Matthias Rau, Gregor Bertrand, Bastian Seegebarth, Peter Kurzok, Bernd Schattenberg, Wolfgang Minker, Michael Weber, and Susanne Biundo. 2014. Companion-technology: Towards userand situation-adaptive functionality of technical systems. In 10th International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE 2014), pages 378–381. IEEE. SFB-TRR-62,Planning,KnowledgeModeling.

Lorenza Mondada. 2007. Multimodal resources for turn-taking pointing and the emergence of possible next speakers. Discourse Studies, 9(2):194–225.

B M Muir. 1992. Trust in automation: Part i. theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. In Ergonomics, pages 1905–1922.

Florian Nothdurft and Wolfgang Minker. 2014. Justification and transparency explanations in dialogue systems to maintain human-computer trust. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop On Spoken Dialogue Systems (IWSDS). Springer, January.

Florian Nothdurft, Felix Richter, and Wolfgang Minker. 2014. Probabilistic human-computer trust handling. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL), pages 51–59, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A., June. Association for Computational Linguistics.

Antoine Raux and Maxine Eskenazi. 2012. Optimizing the turn-taking behavior of task-oriented spoken dialog systems. ACM Trans. Speech Lang. Process., 9(1):1:1–1:23, May.

Antoine Raux, Dan Bohus, Brian Langner, Alan W Black, and Maxine Eskenazi. 2006. Doing research on a deployed spoken dialogue system: One year of lets go! experience. In in Proc. INTERSPEECH, 2006, pages 65–68.

H. Sacks, E.A. Schegloff, and G. Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4, Part 1):696–735, December.

Andrew Sears and Ben Shneiderman. 1994. Split menus: effectively using selection frequency to organize menus. ACM Transaction Computer-Human Interaction, 1:27–51.

F. Sørmo and J. Cassens. 2004. Explanation goals in case-based reasoning. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, pages 165–174.

Nigel G.Ward, Anais G. Rivera, KarenWard, and David G. Novick. 2005. Root causes of lost time and user stress in a simple dialog system. In INTERSPEECH, pages 1565–1568. ISCA.

Zhihong Zeng, Maja Pantic, Glenn I Roisman, and Thomas S Huang. 2009. A survey of affect recognition methods: Audio, visual, and spontaneous expressions. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on, 31(1):39–58.

Citeringar i Crossref