CSCI 644: Natural Language Dialogue Systems
Spring 2025

1. David Traum, "Computational Approaches to Dialogue" in The Routledge Handbook of Language and Dialogue Edited by Edda Weigand, Routledge, 2017 Pre-release version
2. David Traum Socially Interactive Agent Dialogue, Chapter 15 of The Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents (Volume 2) 2022. Preprint
3. Chatbots & Dialogue Systems Chapter 15 of Speech and Language Processing. Daniel Jurafsky & James H. Martin, Draft of January 2025.

1. Barbara J. Grosz, Candace L. Sidner.Attention, Intentions, and the Structure of Discourse. Computational Linguistics, volume 12, number 3, July-September 1986, pp. 175-204.

2. David R Traum, Speech Acts for Dialogue Agents in Michael Wooldridge and Anand Rao, editors, "Foundations And Theories Of Rational Agents", Kluwer Academic Publishers, pages 169--201, 1999.

3. Harry Bunt, Jan Alexandersson, Jae-Woong Choe, Alex Chengyu Fang, Koiti Hasida, Volha Petukhova, Andrei Popescu-Belis, Claudia Soria, and David Traum, ISO 24617-2: A semantically-based standard for dialogue annotation In proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), Istanbul, Turkey, May 2012.
4. Elnaz Nouri, David Traum Initiative Taking in Negotiation, In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL), 2014

1. Mann, William C. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1988. Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8(3). 243-281.
2. Bunt, Harry, and Rashmi Prasad. ISO DR-Core (ISO 24617-8): Core concepts for the annotation of discourse relations. Proceedings 12th Joint ACL-ISO Workshop on Interoperable Semantic Annotation (ISA-12). 2016
3. Eduard H Hovy and Elisabeth Maier. 1997. Parsimonious or profligate: How many and which discourse structure relations. Discourse Processes.
4. Carletta, J. C., Isard, A., Isard, S., Kowtko, J., Doherty-Sneddon, G., & Anderson, A. (1997). The Reliability of a Dialogue Structure Coding Scheme. Computational Linguistics, 23(1), 13-31.

1. ELIZA--A Computer Program For the Study of Natural Language Communication Between Man and Machine Communications of the ACM Volume 9, Number 1 (January 1966): 36-45. HTML version

2. Sutton, S., Novick, D.G., Cole, R., Vermeulen, P., de Villiers, J., Schalkwyk, J. and Fanty, M., "Building 10,000 Spoken-Dialogue Systems," Proceedings of the 1996 International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Philadelphia, PA, 709-712, October, 1996.
   

3. Daniel G. Bobrow, Ronald M. Kaplan, Martin Kay, Donald A. Norman, Henry Thompson, Terry Winograd, GUS, a frame-driven dialog system, Artificial Intelligence, Volume 8, Issue 2, 1977, Pages 155-173,
4. David Traum and Staffan Larsson, The Information State Approach to Dialogue Management in Current and New Directions in Discourse and Dialogue, Ed. Jan van Kuppevelt and Ronnie Smith, Kluwer, 2003, pp 325-354.

1. AIML Overview

2. D. Goddeau, H. Meng, J. Polifroni, S. Seneff, and S. Busayapongchai. 1996. A form-based dialogue manager for spoken language applications. In Proc. ICSLP, 1996 pp. 701--704.
3. V. Zue, et al., JUPITER: A Telephone-Based Conversational Interface for Weather Information, IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, Vol. 8 , No. 1, January 2000.
4. Xu, W. and Rudnicky, A. Task-based dialog management using an agenda. ANLP/NAACL 2000 Workshop on Conversational Systems, May 2000, pp. 42-47.

1. Perrault and Allen A plan-based analysis of indirect speech acts. Computational Linguistics, 6:167-183, 1980
2. Rich, C.; Sidner, C.L.; Lesh, N.B., COLLAGEN: Applying Collaborative Discourse Theory to Human-Computer Interaction, Artificial Intelligence Magazine, Winter 2001 (Vol 22, Issue 4, pps 15-25)
3. Sadek, M. D., Bretier, P., & Panaget, F. (1997). ARTIMIS: Natural dialogue meets rational agency IJCAI (2), 1030, 1035.
4. Smith, D.R. Hipp, and A.W. Biermann. An Architecture for Voice Dialog Systems Based on Prolog-Style Theorem Proving. Computational Linguistics 21:3, 1995.

1. Effective Human-Computer Cooperative Spoken Dialogue: The Ags Demonstrator M.D. Sadek, A. Ferrieux, A. Cozannet, P. Bretier, F. Panaget, J. Simonin Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP'96)
2. Design Considerations on Dialgue Systems: From Theory to Technology - The Case of Artimis David Sadek. ESCA Workshop ``Interactive Dialogue in Multi-modal Systems,'' pp. 173-187, 1999.
   
3. J. Bos and T. Oka. 2002. An Inference-based Approach to Dialogue System Design. In COLING 2002. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 113–119, Taipei.
4. Rich, C.; Sidner, C.L., COLLAGEN: A Collaboration Manager for Software Interface Agents, An International Journal: User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, Vol. 8, Issue 3/4, pps 315-350, 1998
5. The TRAINS Project James F. Allen et al. The TRAINS Project Journal of Experimental and Theoretical AI, 1995.
6. David Traum and Jeff Rickel, Embodied Agents for Multi-party Dialogue in Immersive Virtual World in proceedings of the first International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (AAMAS 2002), pp. 766-773, July 2002.

1. Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F. (1989). Contributing to discourse Cognitive Science , 13, 259-294.
2. David R. Traum Computational Models of Grounding in Collaborative Systems, in working notes of AAAI Fall Symposium on Psychological Models of Communication, p. 124-131, November, 1999.
   
3. Antonio Roque and David Traum, Degrees of Grounding Based on Evidence of Understanding In proceedings of The 9th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGdial 2008), June, 2008.
4. Omar Shaikh, Kristina Gligoric, Ashna Khetan, Matthias Gerstgrasser, Diyi Yang, and Dan Jurafsky. Grounding gaps in language model generations NAACL 2024.
5. Jokinen, Kristiina, Phillip Schneider, and Taiga Mori. Towards Harnessing Large Language Models for Comprehension of Conversational Grounding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01749 (2024).

Other Readings

1. Clark, H. H., & Marshall, C. R. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge In A. K. Joshi, B. Webber, & I. Sag (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding (pp. 10-63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. T. Paek and E. Horvitz.Conversation as Action Under Uncertainty Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-2000), Stanford, CA, June 2000.

3. Janet E Cahn and Susan E Brennan A Psychological Model of Grounding and Repair in Dialog Proceedings, AAAI Fall Symposium on Psychological Models of Communication in Collaborative Systems (pp. 25-33).
4. Colin Matheson, Massimo Poesio, and David Traum, Modelling Grounding and Discourse Obligations Using Update Rules, in Proceedings of the 1st Annual Meeting of the North American Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL2000), May 2000.
5. Katagiri, Y., Shimojima, A., Display acts in grounding negotiations. In: Proc. GÖTALOG 2000: The Fourth Workshop on Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue
6. Gabriel Skantze Making grounding decisions: Data-driven estimation of dialogue costs and confidence thresholdsProceedings of the 8th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 206–210, Antwerp, September 2007.
7. Dybkjaer, L., Bernsen, N.O. and Dybkjaer, H. Reducing Miscommunication in Spoken Human-Machine Dialogue. Proc. of AAAI Workshop on Detecting, Repairing and Preventing Human-Machine Miscommunication. Portland OR, 1996.
   
8. E. Krahmer, M. Swerts, M. Theune and M. Weegels. Error  Detection in Spoken Human-Machine Interaction. In: International Journal of Speech  Technology, 4(1):19-30, 2001.
   
   
9. Nakano, Y., Reinstein, G., Stocky, T., Cassell, J. (2003) "Towards a Model of Face-to-Face Grounding" Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. July 7-12, Sapporo, Japan.
   
   
10. Di Maro, Maria. Computational Grounding: An Overview of Common Ground Applications in Conversational Agents IJCoL. Italian Journal of Computational Linguistics 7.7-1, 2 (2021): 133-156.

1. Ai, H., Raux, A., Bohus, D., Eskenazi, M., and Litman, D. (2007). Comparing spoken dialog corpora collected with recruited subjects versus real users. Proceedings of the 8th SIGDial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGdial 2007),
2. Chia-Wei Liu, Ryan Lowe, Iulian V. Serban, Michael Noseworthy, Laurent Charlin, Joelle Pineau, How NOT To Evaluate Your Dialogue System: An Empirical Study of Unsupervised Evaluation Metrics for Dialogue Response Generation Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 2122–2132, Austin, Texas, November 1-5, 2016.
3. Ron Artstein. Inter-annotator agreement In Handbook of Linguistic Annotation, edited by Nancy Ide and James Pustejovsky, pages 297–313. Springer, Dordrecht, 2017.
4. Shikib Mehri, Jinho Choi, Luis Fernando D'Haro, Jan Deriu, Maxine Eskenazi, Milica Gasic, Kallirroi Georgila, Dilek Hakkani-Tur, Zekang Li, Verena Rieser, Samira Shaikh, David Traum, Yi-Ting Yeh, Zhou Yu, Yizhe Zhang, Chen Zhang Report from the NSF Future Directions Workshop on Automatic Evaluation of Dialog: Research Directions and Challenges

1. Assessing Agreement on Classification Tasks: The Kappa Statistic. Jean Carletta. Computational Linguistics, 22(2):249-254, 1996.
2. Sikorski, T., and Allen, J. F. A task-based evaluation of the TRAINS-95 dialogue system. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Dialog Processing in Spoken Language Systems, ECAI-96 (Budapest, 1996).
   
3. Wieland Eckert, Esther Levin, and Roberto Pieraccini. Automatic evaluation of spoken dialogue systems. In TWLT13: Formal semantics and pragmatics of dialogue, pages 99--110, 1998.
4. Marilyn A. Walker, Candace Kamm and Diane J. Litman. Towards Developing General Models of Usability with PARADISE. Natural Language Engineering 2000.
5. Hone, K. S., and Graham, R. (2000). Towards a tool for the subjective assesment of speech system interfaces (SASSI). Nat. Lang. Eng. 6(3/4), pp. 287–303.
6. Cross-Site Evaluation in DARPA Communicator: The June 2000 Data Collection  Submitted to  Computer Speech and Language , 2002.
7. David R. Traum, Susan Robinson, Jens Stephan Evaluation of multi-party virtual reality dialogue interaction, In Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), pp. 1699-1702.
8. Bohlin P, Bos J, Larsson S, Lewin I, Matheson C, Milward D. Survey of existing interactive systems. Deliverable D1.3, TRINDI Project, LE4-8314; 1999.
9. Ron Artstein and Massimo Poesio Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics Computational Linguistics, 2008.
10. Sudeep Gandhe and David Traum Evaluation Understudy for Dialogue Coherence Models In proceedings of The 9th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGdial 2008), June, 2008.
11. Sebastian Moller Assessment and Evaluation of Speech-Based Interactive Systems: From Manual Annotation to Automatic Usability Evaluation Chapter 15 of Speech Technology, Fang Chen, ed., Springer, 2010.