7,341 research outputs found

    Designing Embodied Interactive Software Agents for E-Learning: Principles, Components, and Roles

    Get PDF
    Embodied interactive software agents are complex autonomous, adaptive, and social software systems with a digital embodiment that enables them to act on and react to other entities (users, objects, and other agents) in their environment through bodily actions, which include the use of verbal and non-verbal communicative behaviors in face-to-face interactions with the user. These agents have been developed for various roles in different application domains, in which they perform tasks that have been assigned to them by their developers or delegated to them by their users or by other agents. In computer-assisted learning, embodied interactive pedagogical software agents have the general task to promote human learning by working with students (and other agents) in computer-based learning environments, among them e-learning platforms based on Internet technologies, such as the Virtual Linguistics Campus (www.linguistics-online.com). In these environments, pedagogical agents provide contextualized, qualified, personalized, and timely assistance, cooperation, instruction, motivation, and services for both individual learners and groups of learners. This thesis develops a comprehensive, multidisciplinary, and user-oriented view of the design of embodied interactive pedagogical software agents, which integrates theoretical and practical insights from various academic and other fields. The research intends to contribute to the scientific understanding of issues, methods, theories, and technologies that are involved in the design, implementation, and evaluation of embodied interactive software agents for different roles in e-learning and other areas. For developers, the thesis provides sixteen basic principles (Added Value, Perceptible Qualities, Balanced Design, Coherence, Consistency, Completeness, Comprehensibility, Individuality, Variability, Communicative Ability, Modularity, Teamwork, Participatory Design, Role Awareness, Cultural Awareness, and Relationship Building) plus a large number of specific guidelines for the design of embodied interactive software agents and their components. Furthermore, it offers critical reviews of theories, concepts, approaches, and technologies from different areas and disciplines that are relevant to agent design. Finally, it discusses three pedagogical agent roles (virtual native speaker, coach, and peer) in the scenario of the linguistic fieldwork classes on the Virtual Linguistics Campus and presents detailed considerations for the design of an agent for one of these roles (the virtual native speaker)

    Leveraging Large Language Models to Power Chatbots for Collecting User Self-Reported Data

    Full text link
    Large language models (LLMs) provide a new way to build chatbots by accepting natural language prompts. Yet, it is unclear how to design prompts to power chatbots to carry on naturalistic conversations while pursuing a given goal, such as collecting self-report data from users. We explore what design factors of prompts can help steer chatbots to talk naturally and collect data reliably. To this aim, we formulated four prompt designs with different structures and personas. Through an online study (N = 48) where participants conversed with chatbots driven by different designs of prompts, we assessed how prompt designs and conversation topics affected the conversation flows and users' perceptions of chatbots. Our chatbots covered 79% of the desired information slots during conversations, and the designs of prompts and topics significantly influenced the conversation flows and the data collection performance. We discuss the opportunities and challenges of building chatbots with LLMs.Comment: 22 pages including Appendix, 7 figures, 7 tables. Accepted to PACM HCI (CSCW 2024

    ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ๊ณผ ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ•˜๊ธฐ: ์ผ๋Œ€์ผ ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ๊ทธ๋ฃน ์ƒ์šฉ์ž‘์šฉ์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์‚ฌํšŒ๊ณผํ•™๋Œ€ํ•™ ์–ธ๋ก ์ •๋ณดํ•™๊ณผ, 2022.2. ์ด์ค€ํ™˜."์ธ๊ฐ„-์ปดํ“จํ„ฐ ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ"๊ณผ "์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ฒฝํ—˜"์„ ๋„˜์–ด, "์ธ๊ฐ„-์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ" ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  "์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜ ๊ฒฝํ—˜"์˜ ์‹œ๋Œ€๊ฐ€ ๋„๋ž˜ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๊ธฐ์ˆ ์˜ ๋ฐœ์ „์€ ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๊ฐ€ ์˜์‚ฌ์†Œํ†ตํ•˜๊ณ  ํ˜‘์—…ํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐฉ์‹์˜ ํŒจ๋Ÿฌ๋‹ค์ž„์„ ์ „ํ™˜ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ธฐ๊ณ„ ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ๋Š” ์ธ๊ฐ„ ์ปค๋ฎค๋‹ˆ์ผ€์ด์…˜์—์„œ ์ ๊ทน์ ์ด๋ฉฐ ์ฃผ๋„์ ์ธ ์—ญํ• ์„ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ•œ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ ํšจ๊ณผ์ ์ธ AI ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์ปค๋ฎค๋‹ˆ์ผ€์ด์…˜๊ณผ ํ† ๋ก  ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ ๋””์ž์ธ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ดํ•ด์™€ ๋…ผ์˜๋Š” ๋ถ€์กฑํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์ด ์‚ฌ์‹ค์ด๋‹ค. ์ด์— ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ธ๊ฐ„-์ปดํ“จํ„ฐ ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ์˜ ๊ด€์ ์—์„œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ํ˜•ํƒœ์˜ ์ปค๋ฎค๋‹ˆ์ผ€์ด์…˜์„ ์ง€์›ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๊ธฐ์ˆ ์  ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ํƒ์ƒ‰ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋กœ ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ์ €์ž๋Š” ์ผ๋Œ€์ผ ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ๊ทธ๋ฃน ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ์„ ์ง€์›ํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ๋ฅผ ์ œ์‹œํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” 1) ์ผ๋Œ€์ผ ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์š”์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ด€์—ฌ๋ฅผ ๋†’์ด๋Š” ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ, 2) ์ผ์ƒ์ ์ธ ์†Œ์…œ ๊ทธ๋ฃน ํ† ๋ก ์„ ์ง€์›ํ•˜๋Š” ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ, 3) ์ˆ™์˜ ํ† ๋ก ์„ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•˜๊ฒŒ ํ•˜๋Š” ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ๋ฅผ ๋””์ž์ธ ๋ฐ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•˜๊ณ  ๊ทธ ํšจ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์ •๋Ÿ‰์  ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์ •์„ฑ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์„ ๋””์ž์ธํ•จ์— ์žˆ์–ด์„œ ์ธ๊ฐ„-์ปดํ“จํ„ฐ ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ๋ฟ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ, ์ปค๋ฎค๋‹ˆ์ผ€์ด์…˜ํ•™, ์‹ฌ๋ฆฌํ•™, ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ ๊ณผํ•™์„ ์ ‘๋ชฉํ•œ ๋‹คํ•™์ œ์  ์ ‘๊ทผ ๋ฐฉ์‹์ด ์ ์šฉ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ฒซ ๋ฒˆ์งธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ผ๋Œ€์ผ ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ ์ƒํ™ฉ์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž์˜ ๊ด€์—ฌ ์ฆ์ง„์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ์˜ ํšจ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ๋ผ๋Š” ๋งฅ๋ฝ์—์„œ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰๋œ ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์›น ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ์—์„œ ์‘๋‹ต์ž์˜ ๋ถˆ์„ฑ์‹ค๋กœ ์ธํ•ด ๋ฐœ์ƒํ•˜๋Š” ์‘๋‹ต ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ ํ’ˆ์งˆ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œ๋ฅผ ๊ทน๋ณตํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด ์ธํ„ฐ๋ž™์…˜ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์œผ๋กœ ํ…์ŠคํŠธ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ์˜ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ์„ ํƒ์ƒ‰ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋กœ ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด 2 (์ธํ„ฐํŽ˜์ด์Šค: ์›น ๅฐ ์ฑ—๋ด‡) X 2 (๋Œ€ํ™” ์Šคํƒ€์ผ: ํฌ๋ฉ€ ๅฐ ์บ์ฅฌ์–ผ) ์‹คํ—˜์„ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ–ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋งŒ์กฑํ™” ์ด๋ก ์— ๊ทผ๊ฑฐํ•˜์—ฌ ์‘๋‹ต ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ์˜ ํ’ˆ์งˆ์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ์ฑ—๋ด‡ ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ์˜ ์ฐธ์—ฌ์ž๊ฐ€ ์›น ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ์˜ ์ฐธ์—ฌ์ž๋ณด๋‹ค ๋” ๋†’์€ ์ˆ˜์ค€์˜ ๊ด€์—ฌ๋ฅผ ๋ณด์ด๊ณ , ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋” ๋†’์€ ํ’ˆ์งˆ์˜ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ์ƒ์„ฑํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ ์ด๋Ÿฐ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์˜ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ ํ’ˆ์งˆ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํšจ๊ณผ๋Š” ์ฑ—๋ด‡์ด ์นœ๊ตฌ ๊ฐ™๊ณ  ์บ์ฅฌ์–ผํ•œ ๋Œ€ํ™”์ฒด๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•  ๋•Œ๋งŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ์ด ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์ธํ„ฐ๋ž™ํ‹ฐ๋น„ํ‹ฐ๊ฐ€ ์ธํ„ฐํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ฟ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ๋Œ€ํ™” ์Šคํƒ€์ผ์ด๋ผ๋Š” ํšจ๊ณผ์ ์ธ ๋ฉ”์„ธ์ง€ ์ „๋žต์„ ๋™๋ฐ˜ํ•  ๋•Œ ๋ฐœ์ƒํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋‘ ๋ฒˆ์งธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ผ์ƒ์ ์ธ ์†Œ์…œ ์ฑ„ํŒ… ๊ทธ๋ฃน์—์„œ ์ง‘๋‹จ์˜ ์˜์‚ฌ๊ฒฐ์ •๊ณผ์ •๊ณผ ํ† ๋ก ์„ ์ง€์›ํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด GroupfeedBot์ด๋ผ๋Š” ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ๋ฅผ ์ œ์ž‘ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, GroupfeedBot์€ (1) ํ† ๋ก  ์‹œ๊ฐ„์„ ๊ด€๋ฆฌํ•˜๊ณ , (2) ๊ตฌ์„ฑ์›๋“ค์˜ ๊ท ๋“ฑํ•œ ์ฐธ์—ฌ๋ฅผ ์ด‰์ง„ํ•˜๋ฉฐ, (3) ๊ตฌ์„ฑ์›๋“ค์˜ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์˜๊ฒฌ์„ ์š”์•ฝ ๋ฐ ์กฐ์งํ™”ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์„ ๊ฐ–๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•ด๋‹น ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ๋ฅผ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ํƒœ์Šคํฌ (์ถ”๋ก , ์˜์‚ฌ๊ฒฐ์ •, ์ž์œ  ํ† ๋ก , ๋ฌธ์ œ ํ•ด๊ฒฐ ๊ณผ์ œ)์™€ ๊ทธ๋ฃน ๊ทœ๋ชจ(์†Œ๊ทœ๋ชจ, ์ค‘๊ทœ๋ชจ)์— ๊ด€ํ•˜์—ฌ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ์กฐ์‚ฌ๋ฅผ ์‹œํ–‰ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ ์˜๊ฒฌ์˜ ๋‹ค์–‘์„ฑ ์ธก๋ฉด์—์„œ GroupfeedBot์œผ๋กœ ํ† ๋ก ํ•œ ์ง‘๋‹จ์ด ๊ธฐ๋ณธ ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ์™€ ํ† ๋ก ํ•œ ์ง‘๋‹จ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋” ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์˜๊ฒฌ์„ ์ƒ์„ฑํ–ˆ์ง€๋งŒ ์‚ฐ์ถœ๋œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์˜ ํ’ˆ์งˆ๊ณผ ๋ฉ”์‹œ์ง€ ์–‘์— ์žˆ์–ด์„œ๋Š” ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์—†๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ท ๋“ฑํ•œ ์ฐธ์—ฌ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ GroupfeedBot์˜ ํšจ๊ณผ๋Š” ํƒœ์Šคํฌ์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ๋‹ค๋ฅด๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋Š”๋ฐ, ํŠนํžˆ ์ž์œ  ํ† ๋ก  ๊ณผ์ œ์—์„œ GroupfeedBot์ด ์ฐธ์—ฌ์ž๋“ค์˜ ๊ท ๋“ฑํ•œ ์ฐธ์—ฌ๋ฅผ ์ด‰์ง„ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์„ธ ๋ฒˆ์งธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ˆ™์˜ ํ† ๋ก ์„ ์ง€์›ํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€ํ™”ํ˜• ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค. ์„ธ ๋ฒˆ์งธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ๋œ DebateBot์€ GroupfeeedBot๊ณผ ๋‹ฌ๋ฆฌ ๋” ์ง„์ง€ํ•œ ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ๋งฅ๋ฝ์—์„œ ์ ์šฉ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. DebateBot์€ (1) ์ƒ๊ฐํ•˜๊ธฐ-์ง์ง“๊ธฐ-๊ณต์œ ํ•˜๊ธฐ (Think-Pair-Share) ์ „๋žต์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ํ† ๋ก ์„ ๊ตฌ์กฐํ™”ํ•˜๊ณ , (2) ๊ณผ๋ฌตํ•œ ํ† ๋ก ์ž์—๊ฒŒ ์˜๊ฒฌ์„ ์š”์ฒญํ•จ์œผ๋กœ์จ ๋™๋“ฑํ•œ ์ฐธ์—ฌ๋ฅผ ์ด‰์ง„ํ•˜๋Š” ๋‘ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ์ฃผ์š” ๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์„ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ DebateBot์€ ๊ทธ๋ฃน ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ์„ ๊ฐœ์„ ํ•จ์œผ๋กœ์จ ์‹ฌ์˜ ํ† ๋ก ์„ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•˜๊ฒŒ ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ํ† ๋ก  ๊ตฌ์กฐํ™”๋Š” ํ† ๋ก ์˜ ์งˆ์— ๊ธ์ •์ ์ธ ํšจ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๋ฐœํœ˜ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ์ฐธ์—ฌ์ž ์ด‰์ง„์€ ์ง„์ •ํ•œ ํ•ฉ์˜ ๋„๋‹ฌ์— ๊ธฐ์—ฌํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๊ทธ๋ฃน ๊ตฌ์„ฑ์›๋“ค์˜ ์ฃผ๊ด€์  ๋งŒ์กฑ๋„๋ฅผ ํ–ฅ์ƒํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ด ์„ธ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์„ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ์ธ๊ฐ„-์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ปค๋ฎค๋‹ˆ์ผ€์ด์…˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์‹œ์‚ฌ์ ๋“ค์„ ๋„์ถœํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ด๋ฅผ TAMED (Task-Agent-Message-Information Exchange-Relationship Dynamics) ๋ชจ๋ธ๋กœ ์ •๋ฆฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค.The advancements in technology shift the paradigm of how individuals communicate and collaborate. Machines play an active role in human communication. However, we still lack a generalized understanding of how exactly to design effective machine-driven communication and discussion systems. How should machine agents be designed differently when interacting with a single user as opposed to when interacting with multiple users? How can machine agents be designed to drive user engagement during dyadic interaction? What roles can machine agents perform for the sake of group interaction contexts? How should technology be implemented in support of the group decision-making process and to promote group dynamics? What are the design and technical issues which should be considered for the sake of creating human-centered interactive systems? In this thesis, I present new interactive systems in the form of a conversational agent, or a chatbot, that facilitate dyadic and group interactions. Specifically, I focus on: 1) a conversational agent to engage users in dyadic communication, 2) a chatbot called GroupfeedBot that facilitates daily social group discussion, 3) a chatbot called DebateBot that enables deliberative discussion. My approach to research is multidisciplinary and informed by not only in HCI, but also communication, psychology and data science. In my work, I conduct in-depth qualitative inquiry and quantitative data analysis towards understanding issues that users have with current systems, before developing new computational techniques that meet those user needs. Finally, I design, build, and deploy systems that use these techniques to the public in order to achieve real-world impact and to study their use by different usage contexts. The findings of this thesis are as follows. For a dyadic interaction, participants interacting with a chatbot system were more engaged as compared to those with a static web system. However, the conversational agent leads to better user engagement only when the messages apply a friendly, human-like conversational style. These results imply that the chatbot interface itself is not quite sufficient for the purpose of conveying conversational interactivity. Messages should also be carefully designed to convey such. Unlike dyadic interactions, which focus on message characteristics, other elements of the interaction should be considered when designing agents for group communication. In terms of messages, it is important to synthesize and organize information given that countless messages are exchanged simultaneously. In terms of relationship dynamics, rather than developing a rapport with a single user, it is essential to understand and facilitate the dynamics of the group as a whole. In terms of task performance, technology should support the group's decision-making process by efficiently managing the task execution process. Considering the above characteristics of group interactions, I created the chatbot agents that facilitate group communication in two different contexts and verified their effectiveness. GroupfeedBot was designed and developed with the aim of enhancing group discussion in social chat groups. GroupfeedBot possesses the feature of (1) managing time, (2) encouraging members to participate evenly, and (3) organizing the membersโ€™ diverse opinions. The group which discussed with GroupfeedBot tended to produce more diverse opinions compared to the group discussed with the basic chatbot. Some effects of GroupfeedBot varied by the task's characteristics. GroupfeedBot encouraged the members to contribute evenly to the discussions, especially for the open-debating task. On the other hand, DebateBot was designed and developed to facilitate deliberative discussion. In contrast to GroupfeedBot, DebateBot was applied to more serious and less casual social contexts. Two main features were implemented in DebateBot: (1) structure discussion and (2) request opinions from reticent discussants.This work found that a chatbot agent which structures discussions and promotes even participation can improve discussions, resulting in higher quality deliberative discussion. Overall, adding structure to the discussion positively influenced the discussion quality, and the facilitation helped groups reach a genuine consensus and improved the subjective satisfaction of the group members. The findings of this thesis reflect the importance of understanding human factors in designing AI-infused systems. By understanding the characteristics of individual humans and collective groups, we are able to place humans at the heart of the system and utilize AI technology in a human-friendly way.1. Introduction 1.1 Background 1.2 Rise of Machine Agency 1.3 Theoretical Framework 1.4 Research Goal 1.5 Research Approach 1.6 Summary of Contributions 1.7 Thesis Overview 2. Related Work 2.1 A Brief History of Conversational Agents 2.2 TAMED Framework 3. Designing Conversational Agents for Dyadic Interaction 3.1 Background 3.2 Related Work 3.3 Method 3.4 Results 3.5 Discussion 3.6 Conclusion 4. Designing Conversational Agents for Social Group Discussion 4.1 Background 4.2 Related Work 4.3 Needfinding Survey for Facilitator Chatbot Agent 4.4 GroupfeedBot: A Chatbot Agent For Facilitating Discussion in Group Chats 4.5 Qualitative Study with Small-Sized Group 4.6 User Study With Medium-Sized Group 4.7 Discussion 4.8 Conclusion 5. Designing Conversational Agents for Deliberative Group Discussion 5.1 Background 5.2 Related Work 5.3 DebateBot 5.4 Method 5.5 Results 5.6 Discussion and Design Implications 5.7 Conclusion 6. Discussion 6.1 Designing Conversational Agents as a Communicator 6.2 Design Guidelines Based on TAMED Model 6.3 Technical Considerations 6.4 Human-AI Collaborative System 7. Conclusion 7.1 Research Summary 7.2 Summary of Contributions 7.3 Future Work 7.4 Conclusion๋ฐ•

    One Explanation Does Not Fit All The Promise of Interactive Explanations for Machine Learning Transparency

    Get PDF
    The need for transparency of predictive systems based on Machine Learning algorithms arises as a consequence of their ever-increasing proliferation in the industry. Whenever black-box algorithmic predictions influence human affairs, the inner workings of these algorithms should be scrutinised and their decisions explained to the relevant stakeholders, including the system engineers, the system's operators and the individuals whose case is being decided. While a variety of interpretability and explainability methods is available, none of them is a panacea that can satisfy all diverse expectations and competing objectives that might be required by the parties involved. We address this challenge in this paper by discussing the promises of Interactive Machine Learning for improved transparency of black-box systems using the example of contrastive explanations -- a state-of-the-art approach to Interpretable Machine Learning. Specifically, we show how to personalise counterfactual explanations by interactively adjusting their conditional statements and extract additional explanations by asking follow-up "What if?" questions. Our experience in building, deploying and presenting this type of system allowed us to list desired properties as well as potential limitations, which can be used to guide the development of interactive explainers. While customising the medium of interaction, i.e., the user interface comprising of various communication channels, may give an impression of personalisation, we argue that adjusting the explanation itself and its content is more important. To this end, properties such as breadth, scope, context, purpose and target of the explanation have to be considered, in addition to explicitly informing the explainee about its limitations and caveats...Comment: Published in the Kunstliche Intelligenz journal, special issue on Challenges in Interactive Machine Learnin

    โ€˜IMPLICIT CREATIONโ€™ โ€“ NON-PROGRAMMER CONCEPTUAL MODELS FOR AUTHORING IN INTERACTIVE DIGITAL STORYTELLING

    Get PDF
    Interactive Digital Storytelling (IDS) constitutes a research field that emerged from several areas of art, creation and computer science. It inquires technologies and possible artefacts that allow โ€˜highly-interactiveโ€™ experiences of digital worlds with compelling stories. However, the situation for story creators approaching โ€˜highly-interactiveโ€™ storytelling is complex. There is a gap between the available technology, which requires programming and prior knowledge in Artificial Intelligence, and established models of storytelling, which are too linear to have the potential to be highly interactive. This thesis reports on research that lays the ground for bridging this gap, leading to novel creation philosophies in future work. A design research process has been pursued, which centred on the suggestion of conceptual models, explaining a) process structures of interdisciplinary development, b) interactive story structures including the user of the interactive story system, and c) the positioning of human authors within semi-automated creative processes. By means of โ€˜implicit creationโ€™, storytelling and modelling of simulated worlds are reconciled. The conceptual models are informed by exhaustive literature review in established neighbouring disciplines. These are a) creative principles in different storytelling domains, such as screenwriting, video game writing, role playing and improvisational theatre, b) narratological studies of story grammars and structures, and c) principles of designing interactive systems, in the areas of basic HCI design and models, discourse analysis in conversational systems, as well as game- and simulation design. In a case study of artefact building, the initial models have been put into practice, evaluated and extended. These artefacts are a) a conceived authoring tool (โ€˜Scenejoโ€™) for the creation of digital conversational stories, and b) the development of a serious game (โ€˜The Killer Phrase Gameโ€™) as an application development. The study demonstrates how starting out from linear storytelling, iterative steps of โ€˜implicit creationโ€™ can lead to more variability and interactivity in the designed interactive story. In the concrete case, the steps included abstraction of dialogues into conditional actions, and creating a dynamic world model of the conversation. This process and artefact can be used as a model illustrating non-programmer approaches to โ€˜implicit creationโ€™ in a learning process. Research demonstrates that the field of Interactive Digital Storytelling still has to be further advanced until general creative principles can be fully established, which is a long-term endeavour, dependent upon environmental factors. It also requires further technological developments. The gap is not yet closed, but it can be better explained. The research results build groundwork for education of prospective authors. Concluding the thesis, IDS-specific creative principles have been proposed for evaluation in future work
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore