Spoken feedback in multimodal interaction Effects on users experience of qualities of inter
- 格式:pdf
- 大小:462.08 KB
- 文档页数:14
全双工连续对话中的多模态拒识技术研究与应用一、概述在当今社会,随着人工智能技术的不断发展,对话系统已经在各个领域得到广泛应用,其在实际应用中所面临的问题也日益凸显。
在全双工连续对话中,多模态拒识技术成为了研究的热点之一。
本文将从深度和广度两个方面对全双工连续对话中的多模态拒识技术进行全面评估,并探讨其在实际应用中的价值和作用。
二、概念解析1. 全双工连续对话全双工连续对话是指在对话系统中,用户与系统可以同时进行语音或文本交流的模式。
在这种模式下,系统不但需要理解用户输入的信息,还需要主动进行回应,形成一个连续的对话流程。
2. 多模态拒识技术多模态拒识技术是指利用多种模态信息(包括声音、图像、文字等)对对话内容进行识别和分析的技术。
通过综合利用多种信息,提高了对话系统的理解能力和准确性。
三、技术研究1. 多模态信息融合在全双工连续对话中,用户可能通过语音、文字、图像等多种方式进行交流。
而多模态信息融合技术可以帮助系统将这些信息进行有效整合,从而更好地理解用户的意图和情感。
2. 长对话连贯性分析在全双工连续对话中,系统需要能够识别用户话语之间的逻辑关系,以保证对话的连贯性和准确性。
多模态拒识技术可以通过分析不同模态信息之间的关联,来实现长对话连贯性的分析。
3. 非语言信息识别除了语言信息外,用户在对话中还会传递出许多非语言信息,比如音调、表情、姿势等。
多模态拒识技术可以帮助系统有效地识别和理解这些非语言信息,从而更好地进行交互和响应。
四、技术应用1. 智能掌柜系统在现代商业活动中,智能掌柜系统已经成为了企业不可或缺的一部分。
多模态拒识技术的应用可以帮助智能掌柜系统更好地理解用户问题,并进行准确的回应,提升用户体验。
2. 情感分析通过多模态拒识技术,系统可以更好地识别并分析用户的情感倾向,从而根据用户的情感状态进行针对性的回应,提高人机交互的质量。
3. 智能辅助系统在一些特定场景下,比如医疗诊断、情感疏导等,多模态拒识技术的应用可以帮助系统更好地理解用户需求,提供更加个性化、精准的服务。
英语教师数字化教学能力提升的行动案例的特色创新Characteristics and Innovations":The rapid advancement of technology has significantly impacted the field of education, and English language teaching is no exception. As the world becomes increasingly digitalized, English teachers must adapt and enhance their digital teaching capabilities to effectively engage and support their students' learning. This action plan outlines the key characteristics and innovative approaches that can be implemented to improve the digital teaching abilities of English teachers.Characteristic 1: Personalized and Adaptive Learning Experiences One of the hallmarks of effective digital teaching is the ability to provide personalized and adaptive learning experiences for students. English teachers can leverage technology to assess students' individual learning needs, strengths, and weaknesses, and then tailor their instructional strategies accordingly. By utilizing digital tools and platforms, teachers can create customized learning paths, deliver targeted feedback, and adjust the pace and content of lessons basedon each student's progress and performance.This personalized approach not only enhances student engagement but also promotes deeper understanding and retention of the English language. For instance, teachers can incorporate adaptive learning software that adjusts the difficulty level and content based on a student's performance, ensuring that each learner is challenged appropriately and receives the support they need to succeed.Characteristic 2: Collaborative and Interactive Learning Environments In the digital age, English teachers can foster collaborative and interactive learning environments that encourage student participation and foster a sense of community. By integrating various online collaboration tools, such as video conferencing platforms, virtual whiteboards, and real-time document editing, teachers can facilitate interactive discussions, group projects, and peer-to-peer learning opportunities.These collaborative experiences not only enhance students' language skills but also develop their critical thinking, problem-solving, and teamwork abilities. English teachers can design activities that require students to work together, share ideas, and provide constructive feedback to one another, fostering a dynamic and engaging learning environment.Characteristic 3: Multimodal and Multimedia-Enriched Instruction Traditional English language instruction often relies heavily on textbooks and written materials. However, in the digital age, English teachers can leverage a wide range of multimedia resources to enhance their lessons and cater to diverse learning styles. By incorporating audio, video, animations, and interactive simulations, teachers can create engaging and multisensory learning experiences that capture students' attention and improve their comprehension.For example, teachers can use educational videos to introduce new vocabulary, grammar concepts, or cultural aspects of the English language. They can also incorporate interactive language games and quizzes that reinforce learning through a more dynamic and enjoyable approach. Additionally, teachers can encourage studentsto create their own multimedia projects, such as digital presentations, podcasts, or short films, to demonstrate their language proficiency and creativity.Characteristic 4: Data-Driven Decision-Making and Continuous ImprovementEffective digital teaching requires English teachers to embrace a data-driven approach to their instructional practices. By leveraging various digital tools and learning analytics, teachers can gather and analyze data on student performance, engagement, and progress. This data-driven approach enables teachers to make informeddecisions about their teaching strategies, identify areas for improvement, and continuously refine their digital teaching methods.For instance, teachers can use learning management systems or online assessment platforms to track student progress, identify learning gaps, and tailor their lessons accordingly. They can also gather feedback from students through digital surveys or exit tickets to understand their perceptions, preferences, and areas of difficulty. By using this data-driven approach, English teachers can make more informed decisions, optimize their digital teaching practices, and ensure that their students are achieving the desired learning outcomes.Characteristic 5: Ongoing Professional Development and CollaborationMaintaining and enhancing digital teaching capabilities requires English teachers to engage in continuous professional development and collaboration. As technology evolves rapidly, teachers must stay up-to-date with the latest digital tools, pedagogical approaches, and best practices in online and hybrid learning environments.English teachers can participate in online workshops, webinars, and training sessions to acquire new digital skills and strategies. They can also collaborate with their peers, both within their own institutions and across broader professional networks, to share knowledge,exchange ideas, and learn from one another's experiences. By fostering a culture of continuous learning and collaboration, English teachers can stay at the forefront of digital teaching and ensure that their students receive the most effective and engaging instruction.Innovative Approaches to Digital Teaching in English Language EducationIn addition to the key characteristics outlined above, English teachers can also explore innovative approaches to digital teaching that can further enhance their instructional practices. Here are a few examples:1. Gamification and Game-Based Learning: Incorporating game-based elements, such as points, badges, and leaderboards, into English language lessons can increase student motivation, engagement, and learning outcomes. Teachers can design interactive language games, simulations, and challenges that reinforce vocabulary, grammar, and communication skills in a fun and engaging manner.2. Virtual and Augmented Reality: Leveraging virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) technologies can provide English language learners with immersive and interactive experiences that enhance their understanding of cultural contexts, vocabulary, and language usage. Teachers can create or utilize VR/AR-based activities that allow students to virtually explore different environments, interactwith digital objects, and practice their language skills in realistic scenarios.3. Artificial Intelligence and Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and intelligent tutoring systems can enable English teachers to provide personalized, adaptive, and intelligent feedback to students. These systems can analyze student performance, identify learning gaps, and offer tailored guidance and support, freeing up teachers to focus on more complex instructional tasks and individual student needs.4. Flipped Classroom Approach: The flipped classroom model, where students engage with instructional content outside of class and use class time for active learning activities, can be particularly effective in digital English language instruction. Teachers can create and curate digital resources, such as instructional videos, interactive lessons, and online assessments, for students to access before class, allowing for more interactive and collaborative learning during the scheduled class sessions.5. Blended and Hybrid Learning Environments: Combining face-to-face instruction with online and digital learning elements can create a more flexible and engaging learning experience for English language students. Teachers can leverage digital tools and platforms to facilitate a blend of synchronous and asynchronous activities,enabling students to access resources, collaborate, and practice their language skills both in the classroom and independently.By embracing these innovative approaches and continuously adapting their digital teaching practices, English teachers can create dynamic, engaging, and effective learning experiences for their students, preparing them for the linguistic and technological demands of the 21st century.。
2020-2023年英语二作文全文共3篇示例,供读者参考篇1Title: Challenges and Opportunities: English Writing from 2020 to 2023Introduction:In the years 2020 to 2023, English writing continues to play a significant role in communication, education, and personal expression. As technology advances and global connections deepen, the demands for proficient English writing skills are higher than ever. This article will explore the challenges and opportunities faced by English writers in the contemporary context.Challenges:1. Writing for diverse audiences: With the rise of digital platforms and social media, writers must adapt their writing styles to cater to different audiences with varying preferences and expectations. This requires a deep understanding of cultural nuances and communication strategies.2. Information overload: In the digital age, writers are bombarded with vast amounts of information, making it challenging to sift through the noise and create original, meaningful content. Distilling complex ideas into clear and concise writing is a constant struggle.3. Maintaining authenticity: In a world of instant gratification and viral trends, writers may feel pressured to compromise their authentic voice in pursuit of likes and shares. Staying true to one's unique perspective and personal values is crucial but can be difficult amidst external pressures.4. Language barriers: For non-native English speakers, mastering the nuances of the language and effectively communicating in writing can be a daunting task. Overcoming language barriers requires dedication, practice, and a willingness to seek feedback and improvement.Opportunities:1. Diverse platforms for expression: The digital age has opened up a myriad of platforms for writers to showcase their work, from blogs and social media posts to online publications and e-books. Writers have the opportunity to reach a global audience and connect with like-minded individuals across borders.2. Collaboration and networking: English writing offers opportunities for collaboration with other writers, editors, and publishers. By networking and participating in writing communities, writers can receive valuable feedback, support, and exposure for their work.3. Self-publishing and entrepreneurship: The rise ofself-publishing platforms has empowered writers to independently publish and distribute their work without traditional gatekeepers. This entrepreneurial spirit allows writers to take control of their creative output and explore new avenues for monetization.4. Lifelong learning: English writing is a skill that continues to evolve and improve with practice and experience. Writers have the opportunity to engage in lifelong learning through workshops, courses, and mentorship programs, honing their craft and staying abreast of industry trends.Conclusion:In conclusion, the years 2020 to 2023 present both challenges and opportunities for English writers seeking to hone their craft and make an impact in the digital age. By embracing diversity, authenticity, and continuous improvement, writers can navigate the complexities of contemporary writing landscapeand leverage new technologies and platforms to reach a global audience. With dedication, passion, and a commitment to lifelong learning, English writers can rise to the challenges and seize the opportunities that await them in the years ahead.篇2Title: The Future Role of English Composition Ⅱ from 2020 to 2023IntroductionIn the fast-paced and interconnected world of the 21st century, the importance of English composition skills cannot be overstated. From academic settings to professional environments, the ability to write effectively in English is a valuable asset that opens doors to endless opportunities. As we look ahead to the years 2020 to 2023, the role of English Composition Ⅱ will continue to evolve to meet the changing needs of students in the digital age.Enhancing Critical Thinking SkillsOne of the key goals of English Composition Ⅱ in the upcoming years will be to enhance students' critical thinking skills through writing. In a world inundated with information, the ability to think critically and analyze arguments is crucial. Byengaging in writing assignments that require students to evaluate and synthesize complex ideas, English Composition Ⅱ will help students develop the skills needed to navigate the complexities of the modern world.Embracing Multimodal CommunicationWith the rise of digital media, the ways in which we communicate are constantly evolving. In the years 2020 to 2023, English Composition Ⅱ will increasingly focus on multimodal communication, which involves the integration of text, images, sound, and video. By exploring different modes of communication, students will learn how to effectively convey their ideas in a variety of formats, preparing them for success in a world where multimedia literacy is essential.Promoting Global CitizenshipIn an increasingly globalized world, the ability to communicate across cultural and linguistic boundaries is essential. English Composition Ⅱ in the years 2020 to 2023 will play a key role in promoting global citizenship by exposing students to a diverse range of perspectives and encouraging them to engage with issues of global significance. Through writing assignments that require students to reflect on their own cultural identities and connect with people from differentbackgrounds, English Composition Ⅱ will help students develop the intercultural communication skills needed to thrive in a multicultural world.Fostering Creativity and InnovationCreativity and innovation are critical skills in the 21st century, where rapid advancements in technology and changes in the workforce are reshaping the job market. English Composition Ⅱ in the years 2020 to 2023 will foster creativity and innovation by encouraging students to think outside the box, experiment with new ideas, and take risks in their writing. By creating a supportive environment that values creativity, English Composition Ⅱ will empower students to become innovative thinkers and problem solvers.ConclusionAs we look ahead to the years 2020 to 2023, English Composition Ⅱ will continue to play a vital role in preparing students for success in an increasingly complex and interconnected world. By focusing on critical thinking, multimodal communication, global citizenship, and creativity, English Composition Ⅱ will empower students to become effective communicators, engaged global citizens, and innovative thinkers. Through a dynamic and evolving curriculum,English Composition Ⅱ will e nsure that students arewell-equipped to meet the challenges of the future with confidence and competence.篇3Title: A Vision for English Writing in 2020-2023IntroductionEnglish writing is an essential skill that is constantly evolving and adapting to the needs of the modern world. As we enter the years 2020-2023, it is important to consider the trends and developments that will shape the future of English writing. In this article, we will explore the current state of English writing, identify key challenges and opportunities, and envision a future where English writing continues to thrive and innovate.Current State of English WritingEnglish writing has undergone significant changes in recent years, driven by advancements in technology and changes in communication patterns. With the rise of social media and digital platforms, the way we write and communicate in English has become more informal, concise, and visual. Emojis, gifs, and memes have become integral parts of our digital language, blurring the lines between written and visual communication.Despite these changes, traditional forms of English writing such as essays, reports, and articles remain important in academic, professional, and creative contexts. The ability to write clearly, persuasively, and creatively in English is a valuable skill that opens doors to opportunities in education, employment, and personal growth.Challenges and OpportunitiesOne of the key challenges facing English writing in the years 2020-2023 is the need to balance creativity and authenticity with clarity and precision in communication. As our digital world becomes increasingly saturated with content, the ability to write in a way that captures attention, engages readers, and conveys meaning effectively will be a competitive advantage.Another challenge is the need to address issues of diversity, inclusivity, and representation in English writing. As writers, we have a responsibility to ensure that our words reflect the rich tapestry of human experiences and perspectives. By embracing diverse voices and stories, we can create a more inclusive and equitable world through our writing.At the same time, there are exciting opportunities on the horizon for English writing. The rise of artificial intelligence and machine learning technology promises to revolutionize the waywe write and interact with language. Automated writing tools, language translation services, and content generation algorithms are already shaping the future of English writing, offering new possibilities for creativity, collaboration, and innovation.Vision for English Writing in 2020-2023In the years 2020-2023, I envision a future where English writing continues to evolve, adapt, and inspire. I see a world where writers harness the power of technology to create compelling, impactful, and meaningful content across diverse platforms and formats. I see a world where English writing transcends borders, languages, and cultures, connecting people from all walks of life in a shared dialogue of ideas and perspectives.As we look towards the future of English writing, let us embrace change, challenge conventions, and champion creativity in all its forms. Let us write with passion, purpose, and integrity, using our words to uplift, empower, and transform the world around us. Together, we can create a future where English writing flourishes as a vibrant, dynamic, and inclusive expression of the human experience.ConclusionIn conclusion, the years 2020-2023 hold endless possibilities for the future of English writing. By staying true to our values, embracing innovation, and fostering collaboration, we can shape a world where English writing thrives as a source of inspiration, connection, and understanding. Let us write boldly, bravely, and beautifully, knowing that our words have the power to change hearts, minds, and lives for the better. Let us write the future we want to see, one word at a time.。
多模态自然语言处理多模态自然语言处理(Multimodal Natural Language Processing,MNLP)是一种将多种模态(如文本、图像、语音等)的信息进行融合和处理的技术。
随着人工智能和自然语言处理的发展,MNLP已经成为研究和应用领域中的热点之一。
本文将探讨MNLP的基本概念、研究方法以及应用领域,并对其未来发展进行展望。
首先,我们来介绍一下MNLP的基本概念。
在传统自然语言处理中,主要关注文本信息的理解和处理。
然而,在现实生活中,人们通过多种方式进行交流和表达,不仅仅是通过文字。
因此,为了更好地理解和处理人类交流行为,在自然语言处理中引入了其他模态信息(如图像、语音等)是很有必要的。
在MNLP中,融合不同模态信息有两个主要目标:一是提高对文本内容理解的准确性;二是提供更丰富、更全面地表达方式。
通过结合不同模态信息可以提供更全面准确地分析结果,并且可以在不同场景下实现更好地交流与表达。
接下来我们来讨论MNLP的研究方法。
目前已经有许多研究方法被提出来处理多模态信息。
其中一种常见的方法是基于深度学习的方法。
深度学习模型可以通过学习大量的数据来自动提取特征,并且可以通过多层次的网络结构来处理和融合不同模态信息。
这种方法已经在图像描述生成、情感分析等任务中取得了很好的效果。
此外,还有一些基于传统机器学习和统计方法的研究方法被应用在MNLP中。
这些方法主要是通过特征工程和模型训练来处理多模态信息。
虽然这些方法在一些任务中效果可能不如深度学习,但是它们仍然具有一定的应用前景。
MNLP在许多领域都具有广泛应用前景。
其中一个重要领域是情感分析。
传统上,情感分析主要基于文本信息进行,但是通过融合图像、语音等其他模态信息,可以更准确地理解和分析人类情感表达。
另一个重要领域是自动图像描述生成。
通过结合图像和文本信息,可以实现自动为图像生成准确、生动的描述语句,并且可以应用于图像搜索、智能推荐等任务中。
A Prototype Robot Speech Interface with Multimodal FeedbackMathias Haage+,Susanne Sch¨o tz×,Pierre Nugues++Dept.of Computer Science,Lund Institute of Technology,SE-22100Lund,Sweden;E-mail:Mathias.Haage@cs.lth.se,Pierre.Nugues@cs.lth.se×Dept.of Linguistics,Lund University,SE-22100Lund,Sweden;E-mail:Susanne.Schotz@ling.lu.seAbstractSpeech recognition is available on ordinary personal computers and is starting to appear in standard soft-ware applications.A known problem with speech in-terfaces is their integration into current graphical user interfaces.This paper reports on a prototype developed for studying integration of speech into graphical inter-faces aimed towards programming of industrial robot arms.The aim of the prototype is to develop a speech system for designing robot trajectories that wouldfit well with current CAD paradigms.1IntroductionIndustrial robot programming interfaces provide a challenging experimental context for researching in-tegration issues on speech and graphical interfaces. Most programming issues are inherently abstract and therefore difficult to visualize and discuss,but robot programming revolves around the task of making a robot move in a desired manner.It is easy to visualize and discuss task accomplishments in terms of robot movements.At the same time robot programming is quite complex,requiring large feature-rich user inter-faces to design a program,implying a high learning threshold and specialist competence.This is the kind of interface that would probably benefit the most from a multimodal approach.This paper reports on a prototype speech user inter-face developed for studying multimodal user interfaces in the context of industrial robot programming[5]. The prototype is restricted to manipulator-oriented robot programming.It tries to enhance a dialogue, or a design tool,in a larger programming tool.This approach has several advantages:•The speech vocabulary can be quite limited be-cause the interface is concerned with a specific task.•A complete system decoupled from existing pro-gramming tools may be developed to allow precise experiment control.•It is feasible to integrate the system into an exist-ing tool in order to test it in a live environment. The aim of the prototype is to develop a speech system for designing robot trajectories that wouldfit well with current CAD paradigms.The prototype could later be integrated into CAD software as a plug-in.Further motivation lies in the fact that current available speech interfaces seem to be capable of han-dling small vocabularies efficiently,with performance gradually decreasing as the size of the vocabulary in-creases.This makes it interesting to examine the impact of small domain-specific speech interfaces on larger user interface designs,perhaps having several different domains and collecting them in user inter-face dialogues.The purpose of the prototype is to provide an ex-perimental platform for investigating the usefulness of speech in robot programming tools.The high learning threshold and complexity of available programming tools makes it important tofind means to increase usability.Speech offers a promising approach.The paper is organized as follows:speech,multi-modal interfaces,and robot programming tools are briefly recapitulated.Then,the prototype is described giving the design rationale,the system architecture, the different system parts,and a description of an ex-ample dialogue design.The paper concludes with a discussion of ongoing experiments and future enhance-ments to the prototype.Proceedings of the 2002 IEEEInt. Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication Berlin, Germany, Sept. 25-27, 2002Figure1:SAPI5.1speech interface application front end with a list of available command words.2Speech,multimodal interfaces and robot programming tools2.1Speech recognition and synthesis Speech software has two goals:trying to recognize words and sentences from voice or trying to synthesize voice from words and sentences.Most user interfaces involving speech need to both recognize spoken ut-terances and synthesize voice.Recognized words can be used directly for command&control,data entry, or document preparation.They can also serve as the input to natural language processing and dialogue sys-tems.Voice synthesis provides feedback to the user. An example is the Swedish Automobile Registry ser-vice providing a telephone speech interface with recog-nition and synthesis allowing a user to query about a car owner knowing the car registration plate number.A problem with speech interfaces is erroneous inter-pretations that must be dealt with[8].One approach to deal with it is to use other modalities for fallback or early fault detection.2.2Multimodal user interfacesA multimodal user interface makes use of several modalities in the same user interface.For instance, it is common to provide auditory feedback on oper-ations in graphical user interfaces by playing small sounds marking important stages,such as thefinish of a lenghty compilation in the Microsoft Visual C++ application.Rosenfeld gives an overview in[7].Different modalities should complement each other in order to enhance the usability of the inter-face.Many graphical interfaces,including robotpro-Figure2:The SAPI5.1sample TTS application mod-ified for use by the prototype system.gramming interfaces,are of the direct-manipulation type.Speech should therefore complement direct-manipulation interfaces[2].Grasso[4]lists comple-mentary strengths and weaknesses related to direct-manipulation and speech interfaces:•Direct manipulation requires user interaction.It relies on direct engagement and simple actions.•The graphical language used in direct manipula-tion interfaces demands consistent look and feel and no reference ambiguity to be usable.This makes it best suited for simple actions using vis-ible and limited references.•Speech interface is a passive form of communica-tion.The medium allows for describing and ex-ecuting complex actions using invisible and mul-tiple references.It does not require use of eyes and hands making it suitable for hand-eye free operations.Put in other words:speech might be used to avoid sit-uations where you know exactly what you want to do but do not have a clue as where tofind it in the graph-ical user interface.It may also help to avoid situations when you are able to describe an operation but do not know how it is expressed in the user interface.2.3Industrial robot programming inter-facesEssentially all robot programming boils down to the question of how to place a known point on the robot at a wanted position and orientation in space at a certain point in time.For industrial robot arms,the known point is often referred to as the tool center point(TCP),which is the point where tools are attached to the robot.For instance,a robot arm might hold an arc-welding tool to join work pieces together through welding.Most robot programming tasks deal with the specification of paths for such trajectories[3].Below is discussed how modeling of trajectories is performed in three different tool categories for pro-gramming industrial robots.Teach pendantA single robot operated by a person on the factory floor is normally programmed using a handheld ter-minal.The terminal is a quite versatile device.For instance,the ABB handheld terminal offers full pro-grammability of the robot.The terminal has a joystick for manual control of the robot.Function buttons or pull-down menus in the terminal window give access to other features.Program editing is performed in a syntax-based editor using the same interface as for manual operation,i.e.all instructions and attributes are selected in menus.Special application support can be defined in a way uniform to the standard interface.Trajectories are designed by either jogging the robot to desired positions and record them or by pro-gramming the robot in a programming language.For ABB robots the programming language used is called RAPID[1].Off-line programming and simulation toolsIn engineering environments,programming is typically performed using an off-line programming tool.An ex-ample is the Envision off-line programming and simu-lation tool available from Delmia.These tools usually contain:An integrated development environment.A simulation environment for running robot programs.A virtual world for visualizing running simulations and being used as a direct manipulation interface for spec-ifying trajectories.Trajectories are designed by programming them in a domain-specific language or by directly specifying points along the trajectory.The simulation environ-ment provides extensive error checking capabilities. CAD and task level programming toolsTask level programming tools typically auto-generate robot programs given CAD data and a specific task, for instance to weld ship sections.The software works by importing CAD data and automatically calculateIDE Visualization Programming Teach pendant Real env.Jogging&lang. Off-line tool Virtual ng.&sim. Task-level tool Virtual env.CAD dataTable1:Visualization and programming in different categories of robot programmingtools.Figure3:Virtual ABB IRB2000industrial robot arm with6degrees of freedom(developed in coopera-tion with Tomas Olsson,Dept.of Automatic Control, Lund University,email:tomas.olsson@control.lth.se). necessary weld trajectories,assign weld tasks to robots and generate programs for these robots.These tools are typically used for programming large-scale manu-facturing systems.3PrototypeTwo observations can be made concerning the user in-terfaces in the above programming environments:The typical task performed by all IDEs(Integrated Devel-opment Environment)is to model task specific robot trajectories,which is done with more or less automa-tion,depending on tool category.The user interface consists of a visualization and a programming part, see Table1.The prototype presented here is a user interface where speech has been chosen to be the primary in-teraction modality but is used in the presence of sev-eral feedback modalities.Available feedback modali-ties are text,speech synthesis and3D graphics.Figure4:XEmacs is used as trajectory editor and database.The prototype system utilizes the speech recogni-tion available in the Microsoft Speech API5.1software development kit.The SAPI can work in two modes: command mode recognizing limited vocabularies and dictation mode recognizing a large set of words and us-ing statistical word phrase corrections.The prototype uses the command mode.It is thus able to recognize isolated words or short phrases[6].The system architecture uses several applications (see Figures1,2,3,4):T he Automated Speech Recog-nition application,which uses SAPI5.1to recognize a limited domain of spoken user commands.Visual feedback is provided in the Voice Panel window with available voice commands.The Action Logic applica-tion,which controls the user interface system data-flow and is the heart of the prototype.The Text-To-Speech application synthesizing user voice feed-back.The XEmacs application acting as a database of RAPID commands and also allowing keyboard editing of RAPID programs.The3D Robot application pro-viding a visualization of the robot equipment.A decision was made to not use any existing CAD programming system in the prototype.The reasons were twofold:extending an existing system would limit the interaction into what the system allowed, making it difficult to easily adjust parameters like the appearance of the3D world and the behavior of the editor.The second reason is that by not including a commercial programming system it is possible to re-lease this prototype into the open source community as a completesystem.Figure5:Prototype system dataflow.3.1System architectureThe prototype system architecture follows a tradi-tional client-server approach.The action logic applica-tion acts as a server with all other applications acting as clients.Interprocess communication is performed using Microsoft Win32named pipes and sockets.The system dataflow is centered around the speech applications since it is the primary modality of the system.Basically informationflows from the speech TTS to speech synthesis application through the ac-tion logic application.The action logic application then interacts with the other applications(XEmacs, 3D robot)in order to update the state and different views supported in the interface(Figure5).3.2Prototype applicationsAction LogicThe action logic application is the heart of the system. All information goes through this application.The logic controlling the interface is hidden here.The basic workflow of the application is:1.Receive spoken commands from the speech recog-nition application.2.Interpret the commands and act accordingly:Send Lisp editing commands to the XEmacs edi-tor that is storing the trajectory as a sequence of RAPID MoveL(Move Linear)commands.Read trajectory stored in XEmacs and send it to the3Dapplication for execution and visualization.Sendfeedback to be spoken to the speech synthesis ap-plication.Microsoft SAPI5.1speech recognition and syn-thesisThe speech recognition and synthesis applications are based on the Microsoft Speech API version5.1.Each application is built by utilizing an example application delivered together with the SDK and modifying it for our purposes.The example applications used for the prototype are CoffeeS0and TTSApp.The modifications necessary were quite small.They included:Adding communication capabilities to the applications so that they could send and receive in-formation from the action logic application.This was done by adding a new communication thread to the application.Modifying the application window mes-sage handler to issue and receive speech messages from the new communication code.Changing the user in-terface to show our domain-specific vocabulary.Andfinally tune the speech recognition application to our vocabulary.This was done by rewriting the default XML grammar read into the speech recognition appli-cation upon initialization.XEmacs RAPID trajectory editing and databaseXEmacs is utilized as a combined database,editing and text visualization tool.The trajectory being edited is stored in an XEmacs buffer in the form ofa sequence of RAPID MoveL commands:MoveL ToPoint:=[940,0,1465,0.707,0,0.707,0], Speed:=v50,Zone:=z50,Tool:=gripper1 MoveL ToPoint:=[980,80,1495,0.707,0,0.707,0], Speed:=v50,Zone:=z50,Tool:=gripper1 The trajectory code is visualized in text form in the XEmacs buffer window.It may be edited using normal XEmacs commands.Thus the interface,even if devel-oped with speech in focus,allows alternate interaction forms.The interaction between XEmacs and the action logic application is done using LISP,see Table 2. The action logic application phrases database in-sertion/removal/modification commands of trajectory parts as buffer editing commands.These are executedas batch jobs on the XEmacs editor using the gnuserv and gnuclient package.Spoken command Emacs LISPAdd point(kill-new”MoveL...”),(yank) Remove point(kill-entire-line)Move forward(forward-line1)Move backward(forward-line-1)Table2:Sample LISP editing command sent to the Emacs RAPID database in response to spoken com-mands.Virtual environmentThe prototype needed a replacement for the3D vi-sualization usually shipped with robot programming applications to be realistic.A small3D viewer previ-ously developed was taken and enhanced with inter-pretation and simulation capabilities for a small subset of the RAPID language.The tool is capable of acting as a player of trajecto-ries stored in the XEmacs database.Player commands (play,reverse,stop,pause)is controlled from the ac-tion logic application.3.3Dialogue designA preliminary experiment based on Wizard-of-Oz data obtained from the authors has been implemented.The basic idea of this interface is to view trajectory modeling as editing a movie.It is possible to play the trajectory on the3D visualizer,insert new trajectory segments at the current point on the trajectory,re-move trajectory segments,and moving along the tra-jectory backward and forward using different speeds.All editing is controlled using spoken commands, see Table3.The user gets feedback in the form of a synthesized voice repeating the last issued command, seeing the trajectory in text form in the XEmacs buffer window and seeing the trajectory being executed in the3D window.The command is always repeated by a synthesized voice in order to detect erroneous inter-pretations immediately.At some points(for critical operations like removal of trajectory segments),the interface asks the user if he/she wants to complete the operation.4Ongoing experiments and future workThe prototype will be used to explore the design space of speech interfaces with multimodal feedback.Below follows a few issues that would be interesting to gather data on:•Varying the degree of voice feedback,as well as the type of information conveyed.Figure6:The prototype system user interface con-sists of four windows;1.The voice panel containing lists of available voice commands. 2.The XEmacs editor containing the RAPID program statements.3. The3D visualization showing the current state of the hardware. 4.The TTS application showing the spo-ken text.•Varying between different kinds of visual feed-back.•Varying the command vocabulary and interface functionality.For instance by allowing some task level abstractions in movement specifications,i.e.move to object,grab object.For the future,there is a list of wanted extensions:•Allow multiple domains in the speech recognition application,with the option of choosing which one to be applied from the action logic application.This feature could be used to test speech inter-faces with state.•Allow the entire experiment interface configura-tion to be specified in XML.Remove all hacking necessary to tune the interface.This would also speed up development since it would be easy to switch between different configurations.5ConclusionWe have developed a speech interface to edit robot trajectories.An architecture based on reusable appli-cation modules was proposed and implemented.The work is aimed at studying feasability and use-fulness of adding a speech component to existing soft-ware for programming robots.Initial feedback fromSpoken commands PurposeForward,backward,left,right,Jog robotup,downPlay,stop,step forward,step Play trajectory backward,faster,slowerMark,add point,move point,Edit trajectory erase pointYes,no User responseUndo UndoTable3:Vocabulary used in the prototype. users of the interface are encouraging.The users,in-cluding the authors,almost immediately wanted to raise the abstraction level of the interface by refer-ring to objects in the surrounding virtual environment. This suggests that a future interface enhancement in such direction could be fruitful.References[1]ABB Flexible Automation,S-72168V¨a ster˚as,Sweden.RAPID Reference Manual.Art.No.3HAC7783-1.[2]Cohen,Philip R.The Role of Natural Language ina Multimodal Interface.UIST’92Conference Pro-ceedings.Monterey,California.p.143-149.1992.[3]Craig,John J.Introduction to Robotics.Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Reading,Mas-sachusetts.1989.[4]Grasso,Michael A,Ebert,David S,Finin,Timo-thy W.The Integrality of Speech in Multimodal Interfaces.ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Intraction,Vol5,No4.p.303-325.1998.[5]Prototype homepage,http://www.cs.lth.se/~mathias/speech/.[6]Microsoft Speech Technologies,http://www./speech/.[7]Rosenfeld,Ronald,Olsen,Dan,Rudnicky,Alex.Universal Speech Interfaces.Interactions Novem-ber+December.p.34-44.2001.[8]Suhm,B.,Myers,B.,Waibel,A.Multimodal Er-ror Correction for Speech User Interfaces.ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol.8,No.1.p.60-98.2001.。
把你想发明的东西介绍给大家英语作文全文共3篇示例,供读者参考篇1A World-Changing Invention: The Universal TranslatorHey everyone! I have this really cool idea for an invention that could honestly change the world. Hear me out – it's going to sound kind of crazy at first, but just stick with me.Imagine being able to understand any language in the world just like that. No more struggling through language classes or getting lost in translation. My invention, which I'm calling the Universal Translator, would instantly translate any spoken or written language into your native tongue in real-time. How awesome would that be?Just think about how much easier communication would become across the globe. Cultural and language barriers would basically disappear overnight. People from completely different backgrounds could understand each other perfectly. It could help prevent misunderstandings that lead to conflicts. Heck, we might even make first contact with aliens someday, and this babywould let us communicate with them! Okay, maybe that's a little far-fetched, but you get the idea.So how would this Universal Translator work exactly? Well, the core technology would involve some seriously advanced speech recognition, natural language processing, and machine translation powered by artificial intelligence. Basically, the device would first identify and transcribe the spoken words into text using speech recognition. Then, an AI translation model would take that text, analyze its meaning and context, and translate it into the desired output language. Finally, a voice synthesis component would articulate the translation out loud.For translating written text, it would use optical character recognition to extract the words from images or documents first before feeding it into the AI translation pipeline. The user interface would be super simple – you could just point your smartphone camera at some text and it would overlay the translation right on top in augmented reality mode. Or for voice, you'd just enable translation mode and it would work like a real-time interpreter whispering in your ear.Now I know what you're thinking – we already have translation apps and devices that can sort of do this, right? Yeah, that's true to some extent. But here's the thing – those existingtools rely mostly on phrase-based statistical translation which isn't perfect. They struggle with less common languages, idioms, context, and just generally sound quite unnatural.My Universal Translator, on the other hand, would use the latest transformer-based neural machine translation models which are way more advanced. These can better understand the full meaning and context behind phrases to produce natural, fluent translations that sound like they came from a native speaker. The AI model would be trained on a massive dataset of translated texts and speech across hundreds of languages to a crazy level of accuracy.I'm picturing integrating this core translation tech into different form factors – like wireless earbuds for voice translation, smart glasses for augmented reality text overlays, or even a handheld scanner for menus, signs, you name it. It could be built into smartphones, car navigation systems, video calling apps –basically anywhere translation would be useful.Just imagine going on vacation and being able to chat with the locals in their native tongue effortlessly. Or being a doctor and communicating directly with patients to better understand their symptoms, no interpreter needed. Businesses could expand globally without worrying about language barriers. Maybe itcould even help unite the world by allowing people from different cultures to understand each other.Of course, bringing a sci-fi invention like this to reality wouldn't be easy. There are some major challenges I'd need to overcome:First off, building AI translation models that work for hundreds of languages at human levels of accuracy is insanely difficult from a machine learning perspective. I'd need teams of computational linguists and engineers to create and train these massively complex neural networks. Not to mention the resources to feed them absolutely gigantic datasets of transcribed speech and text across all these languages.Secondly, the speech recognition, optical character recognition, and audio synthesis aspects would require pretty advanced multimodal AI too. It's one thing to translate plain text, but understanding speech with all its ambiguities and accents adds another layer of complexity.Third, I'd have to figure out the hardware and form factor side of things to integrate all these AI capabilities into small, power-efficient devices people can actually carry around conveniently. Things like specialized AI chipsets, energy-efficientprocessors, microphones, and compact optics and displays. That's a big hardware and engineering challenge in itself.Then of course, the elephant in the room – I'd need a LOT of money and resources to make this happen! I'm talking billions of dollars to hire the AI researchers, engineers, linguists, and teams required to pull this off. Fundraising from investors and navigating intellectual property would be super difficult for a teenager like me.Despite all these hurdles though, I truly think the Universal Translator is an invention that's worth pursuing. The potential impacts on communication, education, diplomacy, business –you name it – would be just astronomical. Maybe it's naive for a kid to dream this big, but I believe the benefits to society would be invaluable.So those are my ideas for revolutionizing how we communicate across languages and cultures! Let me know what you think – would a Universal Translator be helpful or not? What other huge challenges am I not considering? I'd love to get your perspectives. Who knows, maybe with some hard work and a lot of luck, this crazy idea could become a reality someday!篇2The Incredible MemVR: A Revolutionary Learning HeadsetHave you ever struggled to memorize important facts or concepts? Do you find it challenging to stay focused during long study sessions? Well, get ready for a game-changing invention that will revolutionize the way we learn and retain information –the MemVR!As a student constantly juggling between classes, extracurricular activities, and social life, I've often found myself frustrated by the limitations of traditional learning methods. Sitting hunched over textbooks for hours on end, trying to cram information into my brain, only to forget most of it a few days later, is an experience all too familiar to many of us.But what if there was a way to make learning not only more effective but also engaging and fun? That's where the MemVR comes in – a groundbreaking virtual reality headset designed specifically for educational purposes.Imagine being able to step into a fully immersive virtual environment tailored to the subject you're studying. Instead of staring at dry diagrams in a textbook, you could explore a 3D model of the human body, zooming in on individual organs and observing their functions in real-time. Or picture yourself walking through a virtual reconstruction of ancient Rome,witnessing historical events unfold before your eyes, and truly understanding the cultural context behind them.The MemVR's unique selling point lies in its ability to leverage the power of experiential learning. Research has shown that we retain information better when we actively engage with it, rather than passively consuming it. By creating immersive simulations that allow users to interact with concepts and scenarios, the MemVR taps into our brain's natural ability to learn through experience, making the process not only more effective but also incredibly captivating.But the MemVR isn't just about visuals; it's a multi-sensory experience. Imagine learning about music theory by actually composing and playing virtual instruments, or studying chemistry by manipulating virtual molecules and observing their reactions. The possibilities are endless, and the potential for enhancing our understanding and retention is truly remarkable.One of the key features of the MemVR is its adaptability to different learning styles. Some students thrive with visual aids, while others prefer hands-on activities or auditory cues. The MemVR caters to all these preferences by offering a range of customizable learning environments and interactive tools. Whether you're a kinesthetic learner who prefers physicalsimulations or an auditory learner who benefits from narrated explanations, the MemVR has you covered.But the MemVR isn't just for individual learning; it also opens up a world of collaborative possibilities. Imagine being able to connect with classmates or even experts from around the globe in a shared virtual space, where you can work together on projects, engage in discussions, and exchange ideas in a truly immersive setting. This not only fosters teamwork and communication skills but also creates a dynamic and engaging learning community.Of course, one might wonder about the potential side effects of prolonged virtual reality exposure. However, the MemVR has been designed with safety in mind. Its ergonomic design and advanced eye-tracking technology minimize strain and discomfort, while built-in timers and reminders encourage regular breaks to prevent excessive use.Furthermore, the MemVR's software incorporates educational best practices and proven learning techniques. From spaced repetition to gamification elements, the MemVR ensures that users not only enjoy the experience but also retain the information effectively.Imagine the impact the MemVR could have on education. No longer would students be confined to the limitations of textbooks and traditional classrooms. Instead, they could explore vast virtual worlds, pushing the boundaries of their imagination and curiosity. Learning would become an adventure, a journey of discovery, and a truly unforgettable experience.But the potential applications of the MemVR extend far beyond the classroom. Training simulations for various professions, from healthcare to aviation, could benefit greatly from the immersive and interactive nature of the MemVR. Imagine medical students being able to practice complex surgical procedures in a risk-free virtual environment, or pilots training for emergency scenarios without ever leaving the ground.The MemVR represents a revolution in the way we approach learning and knowledge acquisition. It's not just a headset; it's a gateway to a world of limitless possibilities, where education becomes an immersive, engaging, and truly transformative experience.So, who's ready to embark on this incredible journey? With the MemVR, the future of learning is closer than you think. Let'sembrace this revolutionary technology and unlock the full potential of our minds, one virtual adventure at a time.篇3A Revolutionary Invention to Simplify Our LivesHave you ever felt like there just aren't enough hours in the day to get everything done? As students, we're constantly juggling classes, homework, extracurricular activities, social lives, and for some of us, jobs or family responsibilities too. It can be overwhelming trying to stay on top of it all. That's why I've invented something that I believe could be a real game-changer when it comes to better managing our time and reducing stress levels. Let me tell you all about it!My invention is a smart virtual assistant that I call "TempoAI." It's an artificial intelligence program that essentially acts as your own personal task manager and schedule optimizer. Using advanced algorithms and machine learning, TempoAI analyzes your daily commitments, priorities, and goals to create a customized and dynamic schedule that makes the most efficient use of your time.Here's how it works: you start by inputting all of your recurring events and responsibilities into the TempoAI app –things like your class schedule, work shifts, practice times for clubs or sports, and any other regular commitments. You'll also enter important deadlines, like due dates for assignments and projects. TempoAI takes all of this data and starts building out a basic weekly calendar for you.But TempoAI doesn't stop there. It then prompts you to prioritize which activities and tasks are most important to you. Do you want to ensure you get 8 hours of sleep each night? Make that a high priority. Need to reserve 2 hours daily for your part-time job? TempoAI will block that time. Want to spend at least an hour at the gym 5 days a week? Just let the AI know and it will schedule it in at optimal times based on your other commitments.The true power of TempoAI, however, comes from its ability to make dynamic adjustments to your schedule as needed. Let's say you have a huge research paper due at the end of the month for one of your classes. You input the deadline and TempoAI will provide recommendations on how to break down the work over several days, scheduling incremental mini-deadlines for completing research, drafting sections, revising, etc. If you end up falling behind on your self-imposed timeline, TempoAI willrecognize this and reshuffle your schedule to ensure you can get back on track without conflicts.TempoAI can also learn your personal habits over time through manual inputs and integrations with smart home devices and wearable tech. For example, it might notice that you tend to be most productive in the morning hours before noon. It would then prioritize scheduling。
英语人机对话知识点总结IntroductionHuman-machine dialogue plays a crucial role in today's technology-driven world. As artificial intelligence continues to advance, the interaction between humans and machines becomes increasingly important. In this summary, we will explore various knowledge points related to human-machine dialogue and its applications in different fields.1. Natural Language Processing (NLP)Natural Language Processing is a branch of artificial intelligence that focuses on the interaction between computers and human language. It involves the analysis and understanding of human language, enabling machines to process, interpret, and respond to natural language input. NLP has a wide range of applications, including chatbots, virtual assistants, and language translation services.2. Machine LearningMachine Learning is a subset of artificial intelligence that enables machines to learn from data and improve their performance over time. In the context of human-machine dialogue, machine learning algorithms can be used to train chatbots and virtual assistants to understand and respond to human language more accurately. This involves the use of training data, feature extraction, and model training techniques.3. Dialogue SystemsDialogue systems, also known as conversational agents or chatbots, are computer programs designed to engage in natural language conversations with humans. These systems can be rule-based or data-driven, and they can be used in various applications such as customer service, healthcare, and education. Dialogue systems require a deep understanding of human language and the ability to generate appropriate responses.4. Speech RecognitionSpeech recognition technology enables machines to convert spoken language into text. This technology is essential for human-machine dialogue, as it allows users to interact with machines using their voice. Speech recognition algorithms use acoustic and language models to transcribe spoken words into text, enabling machines to understand and respond to verbal commands.5. Sentiment AnalysisSentiment analysis is a technique used to determine the emotional tone behind a piece of text. In the context of human-machine dialogue, sentiment analysis can be used to understand the feelings and attitudes of users. This information can be valuable for improving the quality of machine responses and personalizing the user experience.6. User Experience DesignUser experience design is an important consideration in the development of human-machine dialogue systems. Designers must consider the user's needs, preferences, and interaction patterns to create intuitive and engaging dialogue interfaces. This involves the use of user research, prototyping, and usability testing to ensure that the dialogue system meets the needs of its users.7. Multimodal InteractionMultimodal interaction refers to the use of multiple modes of communication, such as speech, gestures, and touch, to interact with machines. This approach can provide a more natural and intuitive dialogue experience, especially in scenarios where traditional input methods may not be practical.8. Ethical ConsiderationsThe development and deployment of human-machine dialogue systems raise important ethical considerations. Issues such as privacy, bias, and accountability must be carefully considered to ensure that dialogue systems are developed and used responsibly.ConclusionHuman-machine dialogue is a rapidly evolving field with numerous applications and implications. By understanding the key knowledge points related to NLP, machine learning, dialogue systems, speech recognition, sentiment analysis, user experience design, multimodal interaction, and ethical considerations, we can better appreciate the complexity and potential of human-machine dialogue and its role in shaping our technological future. Continued research and innovation in this area will continue to drive advances in artificial intelligence and improve human-machine interactions.。
2024年宁海中学高二区统考考前热身训练试卷英语(考试时间:120分钟试卷满分:150分)第一部分听力(共两节,满分30 分)做题时,请先将答案标在试卷上。
录音内容结束后,你将有两分钟的时间将试卷上的答案转涂到答题卡上。
第一节(共5小题;每小题1.5分,满分7.5分)听下面5段对话。
每段对话后有一个小题,从题中所给的A、B、C三个选项中选出最佳选项。
听完每段对话后,你都有10秒钟的时间来回答有关小题和阅读下一小题。
每段对话仅读一遍。
1.What will Lily do?A.Have a pudding.B.Go shopping.C.Do her homework.2.Why didn’t the man answer the phone?A.He lost it.B.He didn’t hear it.C.His phone ran out of power.3.How did the woman feel about the technology competition?A.It was easy.B.It was boring. C.It was interesting.4.Where can the woman get the bus information?A.From the apartment.B.From the bus stop.C.From the local library.5.What are the speakers talking about?A.How to make a paper plane.B.How to recycle rubbish.C.How to book a flight.第二节(共15小题;每小题1.5分,满分22.5分)听下面5段对话或独白。
每段对话或独白后有几个小题,从题中所给的A、B、C三个选项中选出最佳选项,并标在试卷的相应位置。
听每段对话或独白前,你将有时间阅读各个小题,每小题5秒钟;听完后,各小题将给出5秒钟的作答时间。
Interactive Linguistics is a dynamic and interdisciplinary field that investigates the complex nature of human communication, focusing on how language users interact in real-time conversations to create meaning. It encompasses various aspects such as conversational analysis, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, and psycholinguistics, providing a comprehensive understanding of the intricate mechanisms involved in verbal exchanges. This paper aims to delve into the core tenets of interactive linguistics from multiple angles, offering a high-quality, in-depth exploration.**Conversational Analysis**At its heart, interactive linguistics emphasizes the study of conversation as a primary data source. Conversational Analysis (CA) meticulously examines turn-taking, repair mechanisms, and sequential organization to reveal how speakers collaboratively construct meaning. For instance, the concept of 'turn-taking' highlights the intricate dance of dialogue where participants anticipate, initiate, and conclude their turns, adhering to culturally ingrained norms. The 'repair mechanism,' another key element, underscores how speakers correct themselves or seek clarification when misunderstandings occur, thereby maintaining coherence and continuity in the discourse.**Pragmatic Dimension**Interactive Linguistics also embraces pragmatics, the study of language use in context. It delves into implicatures, presuppositions, and speech acts, exploring how meaning transcends the literal words spoken. In an interactive setting, the pragmatic competence of speakers enables them to interpret indirect meanings, negotiate intentions, and adjust their language according to social contexts. For example, speakers often use politeness strategies to mitigate threats to face, demonstrating how linguistic choices are deeply intertwined with social relationships and interactional goals.**Sociolinguistic Aspects**A sociolinguistic lens is integral to interactive linguistics, examining how societal factors influence language use. This includes power dynamics,identity construction, and the role of language varieties. Speakers adapt their language based on factors like status, familiarity, and cultural norms, shaping and being shaped by the interactive space. For instance, code-switching – the alternation between languages or dialects –can serve as a powerful communicative tool reflecting the speaker's social affiliations and situational demands.**Psycholinguistic Insights**The psychological aspect of language processing and production is also crucial in interactive linguistics. Researchers explore cognitive processes involved in comprehension, production, and negotiation of meaning during interaction. This involves mental planning of utterances, anticipation of interlocutors’ responses, and rapid adjustments based on feedback. Moreover, the brain's capacity for processing information in real-time conversations, including managing overlapping speech and dealing with ambiguity, adds depth to our understanding of interactive linguistic phenomena.**Technological Advancements and Future Directions**In the digital era, interactive linguistics has expanded its horizons to include computer-mediated communication and AI-human interactions. This development has led to new research areas such as chatbot design, natural language processing, and multimodal communication studies. These advancements not only enrich our knowledge of human interaction but also contribute to the development of more sophisticated AI systems capable of simulating and responding to human-like language.In conclusion, Interactive Linguistics, through its multifaceted approach, provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the rich tapestry of human communication. By synthesizing insights from conversational analysis, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and technology, it offers a high-quality analytical lens through which we can decipher the complexities inherent in everyday verbal exchanges. Its continued evolution promises to deepen our grasp of language’s role in constructing and maintaining our socialworld.This summary, while substantial, serves as a mere introduction to the vast and nuanced field of interactive linguistics. Each of these subfields warrants extensive discussion and detailed analysis beyond this scope, yet together they form a harmonious symphony that elucidates the intricacies of human interaction through language. With ongoing research and technological innovation, interactive linguistics will undoubtedly continue to shed light on the dynamic relationship between language and human cognition within social contexts.。
Spoken feedback in multimodal interaction: Effects on users experience of qualities of interactionPernilla QvarfordtDepartment of Computer and Information ScienceLinköping UniversitySE-581 83 LinköpingSwedenperqv@ida.liu.seAbstractFeedback in a multimodal system has so far not been well researched, but is an important issue. This paper looks at how users’ subjective experience of using multimodal interfaces changes when they are presented with feedback in both the graphical and verbal channel. In three conditions the amount and type of spoken feedback was varied and tested in a multimodal timetable information system using a Wizard-of-Oz method. The Wizard was used to simulate the recognition engine and the spoken output. The users’ subjective experience of the system was tested using six different qualities: control, cooperation, habitability, ease of use, affection and anxiety. The evaluation of the qualities of interaction showed an “all or nothing” pattern, that user preferred no spoken feedback, or elaborated human-like spoken feedback, that take initiative. Limited redundant spoken feedback was less well perceived.1 IntroductionMultimodal interaction research typically focuses on how different input modali-ties can be used together to enhance human-computer interaction (see Maybury and Waltzer, 1998). From the perspective of the users, the focus has been on what combination of interaction techniques are most beneficial (see e.g. Cohen, 1992; and Ovaitt, 1996). To date, not much effort has been invested on how the output of multimodal system adds to the usability, and how users subjectively experience the interaction with the multimodal system.In a multimodal system feedback from different modalities can work together to give a more complete feedback and experience to the user. In this paper, we explore how spoken feedback redundant to the graphical channel affects the users subjective experience, and also how spoken initiative influence the users’ experience of a multimodal timetable system.In an early guideline, Hapeshi (1993) suggested that graphical feedback and verbal feedback should not be redundant, since they could interfere with each other. However, this does not follow how humans in everyday life communicate with each other. In a face-to-face conversation participants often give redundant information. In a study of a multimodal file management system, Huls and Bos (1998) showed that supplemental linguistic output as feedback on the users’ action in a graphical user interface helped the users; they made fewer errors, and completed the task more quickly and with fewer actions, especially if the supple-mental feedback was written. However, only spoken output slowed down the users, but increased their task accuracy. The combination of spoken and writtenfeedback also made the users to make more errors, but the spoken feedback dis-turbed the users when they read the written feedback. Berglund and Qvarfordt (2003) found similar results with spoken interaction in an interactive TV-setting. Here spoken feedback in combination with visual feedback was as efficient as only visual feedback. These studies show both drawback and possibilities for multimodal feedback in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, however they do not show how users subjectively experience the redundant feedback.If a system should take initiative is mainly studied in the area of spoken lan-guage systems. But the results from studies in this area do not show conclusive results. For example, Walker et al. (1998) showed that users preferred using a system that prompted for information to a system in which the user had to ask for the information. To the contrary Chu-Carroll and Nickerson (2000) showed that users preferred asking for information to hearing prompts initiated by the com-puter system. In the area of Human-Computer Interaction, many researchers dis-courage the use of initiatives from computers (e.g. Shneiderman, 1992), since they take control from the user. Nonetheless, initiatives by computers have important potential value in multimodal interaction as a way to establish common ground and support the users in their interaction with the system. These two benefits can impact the users’ experience of multimodal interaction.In sum, the importance of the quantity and quality of spoken feedback in multimodal interaction has not yet been established. This current study focuses on how users subjectively feel about varying quality and quantity of feedback in a multimodal system.2 Design of the feedback in a multimodal timetable systemWe base the design of the spoken and graphical feedback on the work of Brennan and Hulteen (1995) and Pérez-Quiñones and Sibert (1996). They developed a framework for feedback in human-computer interaction, which in turn is based on previous work by Clark and Schaeffer (1989). From these sources and Qvarfordt and Santamarta (2000) we identified nine feedback functions relevant to a multi-modal timetable system. These feedback functions are presented in Table 1. The table also indicates which functions are used for graphical feedback. The only exception to a complete comparability of the spoken feedback and graphical feed-back channels is that initiative was taken with only spoken feedback.2.1 The spoken feedbackOne important aspect of the spoken feedback (presented in Table 1) was that it should be adaptive to the user’s language. Longer user utterances would elicit longer spoken feedback, and short utterances would lead to short spoken feed-back. In order for the feedback to be as non-intrusive as possible, the spoken feedback was given to the user if there is a silence.The spoken feedback used in the study consisted of pre-synthesised utterances from a concatenation speech synthesizer, T4 (Telia text till tal). One of the Wizards played the utterances to the user.Function Explanation & ExampleOpening Start using the systemS: Welcome to MALIN PQL (U: SILENCE)Where do you want to go?Dialogue initiative Start a new task/topicS: From where do you what to go?U: From the railway stationClarification Ask for missing informationU: I want to go to the universityS: From? (alt.) From where?Dialogue error g The system indicates that it did not understand the user utter-anceU: To rumblemumbleS: To where? (alt.) Sorry?Support The system indicates that it heard the userU: I want to go to the universityS: Ok (alt.) YesProcess handling g The system indicates that it is occupiedU: From the university to the railway station, today ato’clockthreeS: Just a moment (alt.) Searching in the timetableDirect attention g The system indicates where import information isS: In an area there can be many bus stops, in the table afew of them are visible (U: SILENCE)You can ask for a more precise timetable by choosingone of the bus stopsError message g The system indicates that something is wrongU: From the university to the railway station, today atthree o’clock amS: Unfortunately, there are no buses at that timeHelp message g The system gives the user help on how to use the systemU: What can I do?S: You can enter a bus stop, a place, a street name, or anname.areag Feedback functions used for the graphical feedback and the limited approach.Table 1. Feedback functions and examples of the spoken feedback.2.2 The multimodal timetable system and the user interfaceFor clarity, the multimodal timetable system and its user interface is presented before the graphical feedback. The users interacted with the timetable using speech and pointing on a touch screen. The timetable information system is im-plemented in Java, and was fully functioning except for the speech and gesture recognition, which was simulated using a Wizard-of-Oz method. For further details about the timetable system see Qvarfordt (2003).The graphical user interface is presented in Figure 1. At the top of the inter-face, there are several connected fill-in fields. All these fields need to be filled in by the user in order to get a timetable presented. The fill in field serves as a sup-port to help the users know what to say to the timetable system. The timetable is visible to the left in Figure 1, beneath the fill-in fields. A list of alternative bus stops is shown under the timetable. The map to the right can show locations re-quested by the user. The field for showing a location is under the map. In this study, the user interface was shown on a TFT touch screen.Figure 1. The user interface to the multimodal timetable information system.The user interface is connected to three different databases: the timetable database and two geographical information systems (GIS), one with a spatial reasoner and one that provide the user interface with maps. The timetable data-base used here is the local public transportation company’s (Östgötatrafiken) database1.When the user gives a location other than a bus stop as the point of arrival or departure, e.g. a street name or a landmark, the system will use the spatial rea-1 Available on the Internet address www.ostgotatrafiken.sesoner to calculate which bus stops are closest to the location. If the location is an area, the system will show which bus stops are inside the area. In those cases when the user entered an area the system will present a list of alternative bus stops under the timetable, as shown in Figure 1. This allows the users to choose whether they are satisfied with the timetables, or whether they want to redo the question with one of the presented alternatives. For further details see Qvarfordt (2003). 2.3 The graphical feedbackThe graphical feedback had several means to communicate the different feedback functions to the user. One main function of the graphical feedback was to give the user evidence that the system is listening and has understood as quickly as possible. When the user started an utterance, e.g. “from Resecentrum (travellers’ centre)”, the from-field got highlighted as soon as possible to indicate to the user that the “from” part was understood.The feedback function dialogue error was used if the system did not under-stand the location; then the words “UPPFATTAR EJ!” (Don’t understand) were displayed in the field instead of the name of a location.Process handling was implemented with an animated progress bar, and be-comes visible when the system is searching in any of the three databases.The feedback function direct attention was mainly used when the users ask for a location in the map. The item the users asked for was marked in the map, for example a street was marked with a line and a bus stop with a star. When a time-table displayed, there was a radical change in the visual appearance of the graphi-cal interface, which makes it unnecessary for any additional graphical feedback.Error and help messages were displayed to the right of the map, or if a time-table was present under it.3 Design of the studyIn order to collect valuable multimodal experience we spent a great deal of thought and effort in designing all aspects of the experiment, including system set up, wizard training, and interaction task scenarios.Three independent variables were constructed from the feedback functions; one without any spoken feedback, one with limited spoken feedback, and one with complete spoken feedback, all described below. In all conditions, the graphical feedback as well as the manner of interaction was the same, i.e. speech input and pointing on a touch screen.Without spoken feedback—only the graphical feedback was utilised (see Table 1).Limited spoken feedback—in addition to the graphical feedback functions, spoken feedback without initiative was given by the system. The feedback func-tions include opening (partial), dialogue error, progress management, direct atten-tion, and help and error messages. These feedback functions correspond to the same feedback functions used in the condition without spoken feedback (seeTable 1) except that the system welcomed the user by uttering “Welcome to Malin PQL” when it was initiated.Complete spoken feedback—all spoken and graphical feedback functions were utilised in this condition, including the same as in limited spoken feedback condition, plus dialogue initiative, clarification, and support.The main difference between the limited spoken feedback condition and the complete spoken feedback condition is that the system takes initiative in the latter condition. The initiatives are taken if the user pauses. The initiatives are supposed to help the users get started again. Figure 2 shows an example of a transcribed dialogue from the complete feedback condition.Figure 2. Transcription of a spoken dialogue in the complete feedback condition with feedback function marked. (.) denote full stop and (:) prolonged vowel.Figure 3. Transcriptions from the limited feedback condition with the feedbackfunctions marked.Note the stars (*) in Figure 2. At this point the user makes a break. In this break the system takes initiative and asks for further information. This kind of initiativewas not present in the limited feedback condition. If the user makes a similar break, as shown in Figure 3 at the star, the system just waits for new input.In the limited spoken feedback condition the system made partial openings. This means that the system says “Welcome to MALIN PQL”, but does not take initiative to ask for information, by saying for example “From where do you want to go?” as it could do in the complete feedback condition provided the user did not start speaking as User 7 does in Figure 3.3.1 ParticipantsIn this study, data were collected from 30 participants, 16 women and 14 men. The ages of the participants ranged from 19 to 59 years, with a median age of 25 years. The participants had different background in computer literacy, education, and profession. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the three con-ditions, ten participants in each group.3.2 The Wizards and their environmentThe role of the wizards in this study was to control the spoken and graphical feed-back to the system. During a session one Wizard was needed to control the graphical output and another the spoken feedback. Both wizards had specially designed interfaces to accomplish their task as fast as possible. Before the study the Wizards had extensive training, both with their tools and the scenarios. The Wizards received instructions on how to respond to the user.The participants were located in separate rooms from the Wizards. The wizard could hear the participants via load speaker. They could also see the same screen as the participant.The overall error rate was 12% on the items entered by the wizard, or 3% of the words uttered by the participants. The overall error rate did not differ between the conditions.3.3 ProcedureThe session started with a brief introduction to the study, and the experimenter asked the participants some background questions. Then she gave a longer intro-duction to the study. After that the participants were asked to fill in an additional background questionnaire. Then the system was introduced and demonstrated for the participant, and after the demonstration the participants had an opportunity to try the system.After the introduction, the participant was given the first of the five scenarios, and was instructed to read the scenario and then press a start button in order to start using the system. To finish a scenario the participants pressed a designated button. Then they were asked to answer a scenario questionnaire. The order of the scenarios was the same for all participants. The scenarios were presented to the participants one at a time. This order of the scenarios was chosen to reflect an increasing level of difficulty. The scenarios were given both in written and ingraphical form. They were designed to give the participants freedom to choose how to phrase their location of departure and arrival. The last scenario was taken for the participants’ everyday life, and thus differed for each participant.After the test the participants were asked to fill in a post-test questionnaire, and they were also free to make any comment in a short interview. The question-naire consisted of 45 question aimed to measure different aspects of the partici-pants’ experience of different qualities of interaction. The post-test questionnaire used a 7-grade Likert scale. At the end they were informed that they had partici-pated in a Wizard-of-Oz study, and were asked for permission to use the material for scientific purposes. They received a ticket to the cinema as a reward for their participation in the test. The whole test took from one to two hours.4 Results and discussionsThe post-test questionnaire measured the participants’ attitude toward six qualities that was considered to be important for multimodal interaction (see Qvarfordt, 2003). These qualities were control, i.e. the participants experienced themselves to be in control, cooperation, i.e. if the participants experienced the timetable system to be cooperative, habitability in the sense of Hone and Barber (2001), i.e. if the participants felt they knew what to say to the system, ease of use, i.e. if the participants experienced the system to easy to use, affection, i.e. if the participants liked the timetable system, anxiety, i.e. if the participants felt any anxiety using the system. The reason to choose these qualities was that they would give a better understanding of different aspects of the users experience than more common user subjective measurement, such as user satisfaction, see e.g. Walker et al. (1997). Each of these experience qualities consisted of multiple questions asking different aspects of the same quality.The post-test questionnaire was analysed using a multivariate analysis of vari-ance. The ratings of the questions were adjusted so that a higher value would re-flect a positive assessment of the timetable system.Two performance measurements, task completion time and turn taking, were also collected in order to see if the performance influenced the participants’ sub-jective responses on the six qualities. These results will follow first.4.1 Task completion time and turn takingThe task completion time did not differ between the three conditions, (F(8, 100)=.550, ns.). One reason for the non-difference between the conditions can be that the participants spend most of their time reading the timetables and studying the map. The time the participants in this study spend listening to the spoken feedback was overall small compared to the total task completion time compared to other studies (Berglund and Qvarfordt, 2003; Huls and Bos; 1998).The turn taking was measured by how many dialogue contributions the participants and the timetable system made during a timetable inquiry. For exam-ple, in Figure 2 the number of dialogue contributions are three; the participatemake an initial contribution, the system asks a clarifying question and the partici-pant answers it. Figure 3, from the limited feedback condition, shows another case. It looks like the user made one contribution, however, taking into account the number of times the participant waits for the graphical feedback, the number of dialogue contributions is eight. The amount of dialogue contributions did not differ between the conditions (F(2, 26)=1.063, ns.), although the participants in the limited spoken feedback condition made less dialogue contributions than par-ticipants in the two other conditions, see Figure 4 bottom right.In the complete feedback condition, the participant could choose which infor-mation they wanted to base their turn on. It turned out that the spoken feedback played a larger role in that decision. Of the total number of dialogue contributions, 37% was based only on system’s spoken feedback and 56% on both the graphical and the verbal channel. In the limited feedback condition and the condition with-out spoken feedback, the turns could only be based on the graphical channel.These results indicate that the timetable system’s dialogue contributions were of equal importance for the participants in the three conditions. When the system used spoken initiative, some cues for turn taking shifts from the graphical feed-back to the spoken feedback.4.2 ControlSpoken feedback did not influence the participants’ experience of control. The initiatives the system took in the complete feedback condition did not make the participant feel more or less in control.4.3 CooperationCooperation was divided into four dimensions, in accordance to Allwood et al. (2000): cognitive consideration, joint purpose, ethical consideration, and trust. Spoken feedback mainly influenced cognitive consideration (Wilk’s Lambda=.203, F(14, 32)=2.788, p<.01).Despite the overall significant effect, only two questions, showed any large differences between the conditions, see Table 2. However, these questions did not show any common pattern. The par-ticipants rated the timetable system in the complete spoken feedback condition as giving the least good answers of the three conditions; the condition without spo-ken feedback got the highest ratings. On the question if the participants experi-enced the timetable to give a lot of direct feedback the relation was the opposite.For the rest of the questions on the different dimensions of cooperation only one question, in the ethical consideration dimension, showed a weak difference, see Table 2. The pattern on this question was different from the two questions in the cognitive consideration dimension. Here the limited feedback condition got the lowest ratings.4.4 HabitabilityThe multivariate analysis did not show any differences between the conditions; however, two questions showed difference between the conditions. For one ques-tion whether the participants found it significantly clearer how to speak to the timetable, see Table 2. Interestingly, the pattern for these two questions was the same; the limited feedback condition got the lowest ratings. Also the three ques-tions that did not show any significant results showed the same pattern.Quality Question F (2, 22) p Pairwise p . Cond.M SD 5.755* .01 C vs. L .99 C 6.1 .99 C vs. W .01* L 6.4 .53 I:25 The timetable gave the best an-swers possible L vs. W .07 W 7.0 .02.291 .125 C vs. L .98 C 6.2 1.03C vs. W .21 L 5.9 .69Cooperation Cognitive consideration I:29 The timetable gave the partici-pants a lot of direct feedbackL vs. W .21 W 5.1 1.66 2.672 .01 C vs. L .19 C 6.4 .97 C vs. W .62 L 6.1 1.05 Cooperation Ethical consideration I:30 The timetable prevented the par-ticipants from solving the task,L vs. W .80 W 6.7 .48 2.937 .07 C vs. L .13 C 6.3 .97C vs. W .97 L 5.6 1.08III:1 It was easy to ask the timetable a question L vs. W .10 W 6.3 1.254.061* .032 C vs. L .11 C5.5 1.18C vs. W .72 L 4.1 1.10Habitability III:5 It was clear how to speak to the timetable L vs. W .03* W 5.71.37 3.663* .043 C vs. L .05* C 5.9 .74C vs. W .99 L 4.7 .87Ease of Use I:2 It was comfort-able to use the timetable system L vs. W .12 W 5.6 .973.690* .042 C vs. L .63 C 6.3 1.60C vs. W .99 L 5.8 1.39Anexiety I:33 It was un-pleasant to use the timetable system L vs. W .05* W 7.0 .03.100 .065 C vs. L .13 C 6.1 .88C vs. W .94 L 4.9 1.36Affection I:20 The partici-pants liked using the timetable sys-temL vs. W .08 W 6.1 1.10Table 2. Summery of the question in the post-test questionnaire that showednoticeable differences. * significant on .05 level, C–Complete, L–Limited, W–Without spoken feedbackThe comments from the participants showed that the participants in the com-plete feedback condition and the condition without spoken feedback were cleareron what to say to the system. However, their comments on what supported them in what to say to the system differed. The following comments illustrate this.You followed the fields that you knew that you should fill in. (Participant 4, Without spoken feedback)It [the system] asked, I mean, if you missed something then it asked so of course it [the spoken feedback] helped. (Participant 23, Complete feedback) Participants in the condition without spoken feedback emphasised the graphi-cal feedback in their comments, while the participants in the complete feedback condition claimed that the spoken feedback helped them. In the latter condition several participants thought the system was not very different from calling the public transportation company. In the condition without spoken feedback, the graphical channel played an important role for establishing common ground; in the complete feedback condition the spoken feedback took over some of that role.The participants in the limited spoken feedback condition were less sure about what to say to the timetable. They instead often talked about feeling uncertain. Participant 5 talked about this uncertainty in the interview.It’s a little like when you are not hundred percent sure that you have arrived at the right place when you are calling somewhere. It is a little confused, like when you are not sure that you have given the right information. (Participant 5, Limited feedback)This quote indicates that the participants in the limited feedback condition experienced a lack of feedback from the system to indicate that the system had understood them, i.e. feedback to establish a common ground.4.5 Ease of useOverall, spoken feedback did not influence the participants’ experience of ease of use. The only effect was that the participants thought the system was more com-fortable to use in the complete feedback condition and in the condition without spoken feedback, see Table 2.4.6 Anxiety and affectionThe qualities anxiety and affection had only one question each showed any differences between the conditions, see Table 2. Both these questions show the same pattern, the limited feedback conditions got the lowest ratings.4.7 Qualities of interaction taken togetherThe participants did not experience the conditions to be very different; few ques-tions showed any significant difference between the conditions. However, theresults show an interesting pattern that goes through most of the results. Figure 4 illustrates this trend. This figure shows the questions from the post-test question-naire that showed either significant differences, or tendencies to differ between the three conditions; these questions are presented in Table 2. In seven of these nine questions the limited feedback condition got the lowest ratings, giving the bars in the graphs a u-shape.When analysing the means of answers to all questions in the post-test questionnaire, independent of whether they showed any significant differences or not, would the u-shape still be the most common pattern? This analysis showed that six patterns could be found, see Figure 5. As shown in the figure, the u-shape is the most common pattern.n t t t t tFigure 4. Summery of the results from the post-test questionnaire. Complete spoken feedback always to the right, Limited in the middle and the conditionwithout spoken feedback to the left.%# #%Figure 5. A summary of the direction of the results from all questions in the post-test questionnaire. The complete feedback condition is to the left, then limited feedback and finally without spoken feedback. Higher values up, lower down.The two spoken conditions differed in that the timetable system took the initiative and as a consequence gave more spoken feedback in the complete。