Are we Bayesian referring expression generators

A recent paper by Frank and Goodman (2012) proposes a Bayesian model of simple referential games. One of the claims embodied in the model is that choosing which word or property to use to refer to an object depends on the utility of the property. In this paper, we compare this model to other computational models of reference production, in particular the recent pro (Probabilistic Referential Overspecification) model. We argue that the assumption of utility that guides property choice in the Frank and Goodman (2012) model is inadequate, insofar as it ignores the possibility of overspecification and the role of preference rankings among properties, as a result of which they may be used irrespective of their utility. We show that models that do take this into account, such as pro, have a better fit to experimental data in which participants have the possibility of overspecifying.peer-reviewe

Structuring knowledge for reference generation : a clustering algorithm

This paper discusses two problems that arise in the Generation of Referring Expressions: (a) numeric-valued attributes, such as size or location; (b) perspective-taking in reference. Both problems, it is argued, can be resolved if some structure is imposed on the available knowledge prior to content determination. We describe a clustering algorithm which is sufficiently general to be applied to these diverse problems, discuss its application, and evaluate its performance.peer-reviewe

Factors causing overspecification in definite descriptions

Speakers often overspecify their target descriptions and include more information than necessary for unique identification of the target referent. In the current paper, we study the production of definite target descriptions, and explore several factors that might influence the amount of information that is included in these descriptions. First, we present the results of a large-scale experiment investigating referential overspecification as a function of the properties of a target referent and the communicative setting. The results show that speakers (both in written and oral conditions) tend to provide more information when a target is plural rather than singular, and in domains where the speaker has more referential possibilities to describe the target. However, written and spoken referring expressions do not differ in terms of semantic redundancy. We conclude our paper by discussing the implications of our empirical findings for pragmatic theory and for language production models.peer-reviewe

Overspecification and incremental referential processing: An eye-tracking study

Using eye-tracking, we examined if over-specification hinders or facilitates referential processes selection, and the extent to which this depends on the properties of the attribute mentioned in the referring expressions and the underpinning processing mode. Following spoken instructions, participants selected the referent in a visual display while their eye movements were monitored. The referring expressions were presented either simultaneously with the displays, so the attributes could be incrementally processed in sequence, or before the display presentation, so the attributes could be processed in parallel from the outset of search. Experiment 1 showed that when the attributes were processed incrementally, how quickly an earlier-mentioned attribute discriminated determined whether a late-mentioned, over-specified attribute contributed to discrimination: When color was mentioned first and fully discriminating, the referent was selected fast regardless of the second-mentioned pattern, whereas when pattern was mentioned first and fully discriminating, the second-mentioned color facilitated discrimination. Experiment 2 found that under incremental processing, color mention after a fully discriminating pattern increased fixations but delayed referent selection relative to a pattern-only description; under parallel processing, however, color mention immediately eliminated alternatives and sped up referent selection. Experiment 3 showed that pattern mention after a fully discriminating color delayed referent selection and tended to reduce fixations relative to a color-only description in both processing modes. Hence, additional attributes can speed up referent selection but only when they can discriminate much faster than alternative attributes mentioned in a more concise description, and critically, when they can be used early for referent search

THE COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY OF AVOIDING CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURES

ABSTRACt Referring expressions and other object descriptions should be maximal under the Local Brevity, No Unnecessary Components, and Lexical Preference preference rules; otherwise, they may lead hearers to infer unwanted conversational implicatures. These preference rules can be incorporated into a polyno-mial time generation algorithm, while some alterna-tive formalizations of conversational impficature make the generation task NP-Hard. 1

Modeling Generalized Implicatures Using Non-monotonic Logics

This paper reports on an approach to model generalized implicatures using nonmonotonic logics. The approach, called compositional, is based on the idea of compositional semantics, where the implicatures carried by a sentence are constructed from the implicatures carried by its constituents, but it also includes some aspects nonmonotonic logics in order to model the defeasibility of generalized implicatures. © Springer Science+Business Media 2007.162195216Allan, K., The lexicon and quantity implicatures (1999) Proceedings of the 1999 conference of the Australian linguistic, societyAllen, J., Towards a general theory of action and time (1984) Artificial Intelligence, 23, pp. 123-154Atlas, J.D., Levinson, S.C., It-clefts, informativeness, and logical form: Radical pragmatics (1981) Radical pragmatics, pp. 1-57. , P. Cole Ed, New York: Academic PressBesnard, P., (1989) An introduction to default logic, , Springer-VerlagCarston, R., Quantity maxims and generalized implicature (1995) Lingua, 96, pp. 213-244Carston, R., Informativeness, relevance and scalar implicature (1998) Relevance theory: Applications and implications, pp. 179-236. , R. Carston, & S. Uchida Eds, John BenjaminsChierchia, O., (2002) Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/ pragmatics interface, , Unpublished Manuscript, University of Milan BicoccaCooper, R., (1983) Quantification and syntactic theory, , Dordrecht, Holland: D. ReidelDale, R., Reiter, E., Computational interpretations of the Gricean maxims in the generation of referring expressions (1995) Cognitive Science, 19 (2), pp. 233-263Dowty, D.R., Wall, R.E., Peters, S., Introduction to Montague, semantics (1981) Syntese Language Library, 11. , of, Dordrecht, Holland: D. ReidelEtherington, D.W., (1988) Reasoning with incomplete information, , Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufman(1987) Generalized quantifiers: Linguistic and logical approaches, , Gardenfors, P, Ed, Dordrecht: ReidelGazdar, G., (1979) PragmaticsImplicature, presupposition and logical form, , New York: Academic PressGrasso, E., Lesmo, L., Lombardo, V., Macario, P.M., Salato, R., Terenazi, P., Semantic interpretation of tense, actionality and aspect (1990) Proceedings of the 9th European conference on artificial intelligence, pp. 320-325Green, N.L., Carberry, S., A hybrid reasoning model for indirect answers (1994) Proceedings of the thirty-second meeting of the association for computational linguistics, pp. 58-65. , J. Pustejovsky Ed, San FranciscoGrice, H.P., Logic and conversation (1975) Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, , P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan Eds, New York: Academic PressHarnish, R.M., Logical form and implicature (1976) An integrated theory of linguistic ability, pp. 313-392. , T. Bever, J. Katz, & T. Langendoen Eds, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell CompanyHirschberg, J. B. (1985). A theory of scalar implicatures. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. Also published as Technical Report MS-CIS-85-56, LINC LAB 21, Department of Computer and Information SciencesHobbs, J.R., Ontological promiscuity (1985) Proceedings of the 23rd annual meeting of the ACL, pp. 61-69Horn, L. R. (1972). On the semantic properties of the logical operators in English. Ph.D. thesis, UCLAHorn, L.R., Towards a new taxonomy of pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicatures (1984) Meaning, form, and use in context: Linguistic applicationsLascarides, A., Asher, N., Discourse relations and defeasible knowledge (1991) Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, pp. 55-62Levinson, S.C., (2000) Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature, , MIT PressLifschitz, V., Computing circumscription (1985) Proceedings of the ninth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, pp. 121-127Lifschitz, V., Pointwise circumscription: Preliminary report (1986) Proceedings American Association for Artificial Intelligence, pp. 406-410. , Philadelphia, PALyons, D., Hirst, G., A frame-based semantics for focusing subjuncts (1990) Proceedings of the 28th annual meeting, association for computational linguistics, pp. 54-61Marcu, D., Hirst, G., A formal and computational characterization of pragmatic infelicities (1996) Proceedings of the twelfth European conference on artificial intelligence, pp. 587-591McCarthy, J., Circumscription - a form of non-monotonic reasoning (1980) Artificial Intelligence, 13, pp. 27-39McCarthy, J., Applications of circumscription to formalizing common-sense reasoning (1986) Artificial Intelligence, 28, pp. 89-116Mercer, R.E., Using default logic to derive natural language presuppositions (1988) Proceedings of the seventh biennial conference of the Canadian society for computational studies of intelligence, pp. 14-21Montague, R., The proper treatment of quantifiers in ordinary English (1973) Approaches to natural language, pp. 221-242. , J. Hintikka, J. Moravcsik, & P. Suppes Eds, Dordrecht, Holland: D. ReidelOberlander, J., Lascarides, A., Preventing false temporal implicatures: Interactive defaults for text generation (1992) Proceedings of the 14th international conference on computational linguistics, pp. 721-727Pereira, F.C.N., Shieber, S.M., Prolog and natural-language analysis (1987) CSLI Lecture Notes, 10. , Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information, NumberPollard, C., Sag, I.A., Information-based syntax and semantics (1987) CSLI Lecture Notes, 13. , Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information, NumberReiter, R., A logic for default reasoning (1980) Artificial Intelligence, 13, pp. 81-132Reiter, E., The computational complexity of avoiding conversational implicatures (1990) 28th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, pp. 97-104Rooth, M., A theory of focus interpretation (1992) Natural Language Semantics, 1 (1), pp. 75-116Rooy, R., Conversational implicatures and communication theory (2003) Current and new directions in discourse and dialogue, , J. van Kuppevelt, & R. Smith Eds, KluwerSauerland, U., On the computation of conversational implicatures (2001) Semantics and linguistic theory (SALT) 11th annual meetingSauerland, U., Scalar implicatures in complex sentences (2004) Linguistics and Philosophy, 27 (3), pp. 367-391Shieber, S.M., (1986) An introduction to unification-based approaches to grammar, , Chicago: Chicago University PressThomason, R.H., Accommodation, meaning, and implicature: Interdisciplinary foundations for pragmatics (1990) Intentions in communication, pp. 325-364. , P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, & M. E. Pollack Eds, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Chapt. 16, ppvan Rooy, R., (2002) Relevance implicatures, , http://stafiscience.uva.nl/ vanrooy/papers.htmlWainer, J., Uses of nonmonotonic logic in natural language understanding: Generalized implicatures (1991), Technical Report CS-91-17, Penn State University. Department of Computer Science, University Park, PA 16802Wainer, J., Epistemic extension of prepositional preference logics (1993) Proceedings of the 13th international joint conference on artificial intelligence, pp. 382-38