Archive for the ‘Language’ Category

Scaling Spreading Activation for Information Retrieval

The Information Retrieval Intelligent Assistant (IRIA) project applies principles of memory retrieval from cognitive science to the problem of information retrieval from large heterogeneous databases. IRIA uses spreading activation over a semantic network for information retrieval, a technique which has proven effective in a variety of tasks. However, some of the very features which motivated the choice of spreading activation for information retrieval — such the use of fanout to automatically compute term weights, or the use of thresholds to automatically limit computation spent on irrelevant items — can introduce new problems as systems are scaled to larger sizes.

This paper discusses the use of semantic networks and spreading activation for information retrieval in the context of the IRIA approach, reviews some of the problems that arise as these technologies are scaled up to production systems, presents some preliminary results that illustrate these problems in practice, and discusses potential solutions.

Read the paper:

Scaling Spreading Activation for Information Retrieval

by Anthony Francis, Mark Devaney, Juan Santamaria, Ashwin Ram

International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ICAI-01), Las Vegas, Nevada, March 2001
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/er-01-01.pdf

Introspective Multistrategy Learning: On the Construction of Learning Strategies

A central problem in multistrategy learning systems is the selection and sequencing of machine learning algorithms for particular situations. This is typically done by the system designer who analyzes the learning task and implements the appropriate algorithm or sequence of algorithms for that task. We propose a solution to this problem which enables an AI system with a library of machine learning algorithms to select and sequence appropriate algorithms autonomously. Furthermore, instead of relying on the system designer or user to provide a learning goal or target concept to the learning system, our method enables the system to determine its learning goals based on analysis of its successes and failures at the performance task.

The method involves three steps: Given a performance failure, the learner examines a trace of its reasoning prior to the failure to diagnose what went wrong (blame assignment); given the resultant explanation of the reasoning failure, the learner posts explicitly represented learning goals to change its background knowledge (deciding what to learn); and given a set of learning goals, the learner uses nonlinear planning techniques to assemble a sequence of machine learning algorithms, represented as planning operators, to achieve the learning goals (learning-strategy construction). In support of these operations, we define the types of reasoning failures, a taxonomy of failure causes, a second-order formalism to represent reasoning traces, a taxonomy of learning goals that specify desired change to the background knowledge of a system, and a declarative task-formalism representation of learning algorithms.

We present the Meta-AQUA system, an implemented multistrategy learner that operates in the domain of story understanding. Extensive empirical evaluations of Meta-AQUA show that it performs significantly better in a deliberative, planful mode than in a reflexive mode in which learning goals are ablated and, furthermore, that the arbitrary ordering of learning algorithms can lead to worse performance than no learning at all. We conclude that explicit representation and sequencing of learning goals is necessary for avoiding negative interactions between learning algorithms that can lead to less effective learning.

Read the paper:

Introspective Multistrategy Learning: On the Construction of Learning Strategies

by Mike Cox, Ashwin Ram

Artificial Intelligence, 112:1-55, 1999
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/er-99-01.pdf

Understanding Language Understanding: Computional Models of Reading

This book highlights cutting-edge research relevant to the building of a computational model of reading comprehension, as in the processing and understanding of a natural language text or story. A distinguishing feature of the book is its emphasis on “real” understanding of “real” narrative texts rather than on syntactic parsing of single sentences taken out of context or on limited understanding of small, researcher-constructed stories.

The book takes an interdisciplinary approach to the study of reading, with contributions from computer science, psychology, and philosophy. Contributors cover the theoretical and psychological foundations of the research in discussions of what it means to understand a text, how one builds a computational model, and related issues in knowledge representation and reasoning. The book also addresses some of the broader issues that a natural language system must deal with, such as reading in context, linguistic novelty, and information extraction.

Contributors:
Dorrit Billman, Michael T. Cox, Eric Domeshek, Kurt Eiselt, Charles R. Fletcher, Richard Gerrig, Jennifer Holbrook, Eric Jones, Trent Lange, Mark Langston, Joe Magliano, Kavi Mahesh, Bonnie J. F. Meyer, Justin Peterson, William J. Rapaport, Ellen Riloff, Stuart C. Shapiro, Tom Trabasso, Charles M. Wharton.

Find the book:

Understanding Language Understanding: Computional Models of Reading

edited by Ashwin Ram, Kenneth Moorman

MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999, ISBN 978-0-262-18192-1
mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=3953

Preview the book: books.google.com/books?id=sL9Lsy3bDecC

Table of Contents

About the Editors

About the Authors
Foreword
Chapter 1 (Introduction) Toward a Theory of Reading and Understanding, Ram, Moorman
Chapter 2 (Foundations) Cognition and Fiction, Rapaport, Shapiro
Chapter 3 (Sentence Processing) Sentence Processing in Understanding: Interaction and Integration of Knowledge Sources, Mahesh, Eiselt, Holbrook
Chapter 4 (Knowledge Representation) Capturing the Contents of Complex Narratives, Domeshek, Jones, Ram
Chapter 5 (Memory and Inference) Retrieval from Episodic Memory by Inferencing and Disambiguation, Lange, Wharton
Chapter 6 (Inference and Comprehension) A Connectionist Model of Narrative Comprehension, Langston, Trabasso, Magliano
Chapter 7 (Contextualization: Text Structure) Importance of Text Structure in Everyday Reading, Meyer
Chapter 8 (Contextualization: Goals) A Theory of Questions and Question Asking, Ram
Chapter 9 (Linguistic Novelty) Semantic Correspondence Theory, Peterson, Billman
Chapter 10 (Conceptual Novelty) Creativity in Reading: Understanding Novel Concepts, Moorman, Ram
Chapter 11 (Meta-Reasoning and Learning) On the Intersection of Story Understanding and Learning, Cox, Ram
Chapter 12 (Alternative Approaches) Information Extraction as a Stepping Stone toward Story Understanding, Riloff
Chapter 13 (Foundations Revisited) Text Processing and Narrative Worlds, Gerrig
Chapter 14 (Commentary) Computational Models of Reading and Understanding: What Good Are They?, Fletcher
Index

A Functional Theory of Creative Reading: Process, Knowledge, and Evaluation

Reading is a complex cognitive behavior, making use of dozens of tasks to achieve comprehension. As such, it represents an important aspect of general cognition; the benefits of having a theory of reading would be far-reaching. Additionally, there is an aspect of reading which has been largely ignored by the research, namely, reading appears to encompass a creative process. In this dissertation, I present a theory capable of explaining creative reading. There are not separate reading behaviors, some mundane and some creative; instead, all of reading must be understood as a creative process. Therefore, a comprehensive theory of reading and creativity is needed. Unfortunately, although the scientific study of reading has been undertaken for almost a century, it is often done in a piecemeal fashion–that is, the research has often concentrated on a narrow aspect of reading behavior. This is due, to some degree, to the fact that reading is a huge process–however, it is my belief that failing to consider the complete reading process will limit the research, Thus, in my work, I identify a set of tasks which sufficiently covers the reading process for short narratives. Together, these tasks form the basis of a functional theory of reading.

Using the reading framework to support the research, I produced a theory of creative understanding, which is the process by which novel concepts come to be understood by a reasoner. To accomplish this, I created a taxonomy of novelty types, I produced a knowledge representation and ontology of sufficient flexibility to permit the representation of a wide-range of conceptual forms, and I created an interlocking set of four tasks which act together to produce the behavior–memory retrieval, analogical mapping, base-constructive analogy, and problem reformulation. My technique for base-constructive analogy is one of the more unique features of my work; it permits existing concepts to be combined in ways which enable novel concepts to be understood. In addition to that, the theory provides for reasonable bounding to occur on the process of creative understanding through a set of heuristics associated with the ontology. This allows reasonable bounding to occur while greatly reducing the possibility of non-useful understandings.

The theory of creative reading is instantiated in a computer model, the ISAAC system, which reads and comprehends short science fiction stories. The model has allowed me to perform empirical evaluation, providing an important stage in the overall theory revision cycle. The evaluation demonstrated that ISAAC can answer independently-generated comprehension questions about a set of science fiction stories with skill comparable to a group of college students. This result, along with an analysis of the internal workings of the model enables me to claim that my theory of creative reading is sufficient to explain important aspects of the behavior.

Read the thesis:

A functional theory of creative reading: Process, knowledge, and evaluation

by Kenneth Moorman

PhD Thesis, College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 1997
www.cs.transy.edu/kmoorman/Dissertation/

The Role of Ontology in Creative Understanding

Successful creative understanding requires that a reasoner be able to manipulate known concepts in order to understand novel ones. A major problem arises, however, when one considers exactly how these manipulations are to be bounded. If a bound is imposed which is too loose, the reasoner is likely to create bizarre understandings rather than useful creative ones. On the other hand, if the bound is too tight, the reasoner will not have the flexibility needed to deal with a wide range of creative understanding experiences. Our approach is to make use of a principled ontology as one source of reasonable bounding. This allows our creative understanding theory to have good explanatory power about the process while allowing the computer implementation of the theory (the ISAAC system) to be flexible without being bizarre in the task domain of reading science fiction short stories.

Read the paper:

The Role of Ontology in Creative Understanding

by Kenneth Moorman, Ashwin Ram

18th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci-96), San Diego, CA, July 1996
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/er-96-01.pdf

Introspective Multistrategy Learning: Constructing a Learning Strategy under Reasoning Failure

The thesis put forth by this dissertation is that introspective analyses facilitate the construction of learning strategies. Furthermore, learning is much like nonlinear planning and problem solving. Like problem solving, it can be specified by a set of explicit learning goals (i.e., desired changes to the reasoner’s knowledge); these goals can be achieved by constructing a plan from a set of operators (the learning algorithms) that execute in a knowledge space. However, in order to specify learning goals and to avoid negative interactions between operators, a reasoner requires a model of its reasoning processes and knowledge.

With such a model, the reasoner can declaratively represent the events and causal relations of its mental world in the same manner that it represents events and relations in the physical world. This representation enables introspective self-examination, which contributes to learning by providing a basis for identifying what needs to be learned when reasoning fails. A multistrategy system possessing several learning algorithms can decide what to learn, and which algorithm(s) to apply, by analyzing the model of its reasoning. This introspective analysis therefore allows the learner to understand its reasoning failures, to determine the causes of the failures, to identify needed knowledge repairs to avoid such failures in the future, and to build a learning strategy (plan).

Thus, the research goal is to develop both a content theory and a process theory of introspective multistrategy learning and to establish the conditions under which such an approach is fruitful. Empirical experiments provide results that support the claims herein. The theory was implemented in a computational model called Meta-AQUA that attempts to understand simple stories. The system uses case-based reasoning to explain reasoning failures and to generate sets of learning goals, and it uses a standard non-linear planner to achieve these goals.

Evaluating Meta-AQUA with and without learning goals generated results indicating that computational introspection facilitates the learning process. In particular, the results lead to the conclusion that the stage that posts learning goals is a necessary stage if negative interactions between learning methods are to be avoided and if learning is to remain effective.

Read the thesis:

Introspective multistrategy learning: Constructing a learning strategy under reasoning failure

by Michael T. Cox

PhD Thesis, Technical Report GIT-CC-96/06, College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 1996
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/git-cc-96-06.pdf

Interacting Learning-Goals: Treating Learning as a Planning Task

This research examines the metaphor of goal-driven planning as a tool for performing the integration of multiple learning algorithms. In case-based reasoning systems, several learning techniques may apply to a given situation. In a failure-driven learning environment, the problems of strategy construction are to choose and order the best set of learning algorithms or strategies that recover from a processing failure and to use those strategies to modify the system’s background knowledge so that the failure will not be repeated in similar future situations.

A solution to this problem is to treat learning-strategy construction as a planning problem with its own set of goals. Learning goals, as opposed to ordinary goals, specify desired states in the background knowledge of the learner, rather than desired states in the external environment of the planner. But as with traditional goal-based planners, management and pursuit of these learning goals becomes a central issue in learning. Example interactions of learning-goals are presented from a multistrategy learning system called Meta-AQUA that combines a case-based approach to learning with non linear planning to achieve goals in a knowledge space.

Read the paper:

Interacting Learning-Goals: Treating Learning as a Planning Task

by Mike Cox, Ashwin Ram

In J.-P. Haton, M. Keane, & M. Manago (editors), Advances in Case-Based Reasoning (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence), 60-74, Springer-Verlag, 1995. Earlier version presented at the Second European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning (EWCBR-94), Chantilly, France, 1994.
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/er-95-09.ps

Integrating Creativity and Reading: A Functional Approach

Reading has been studied for decades by a variety of cognitive disciplines, yet no theories exist which sufficiently describe and explain how people accomplish the complete task of reading real-world texts. In particular, a type of knowledge intensive reading known as creative reading has been largely ignored by the past research. We argue that creative reading is an aspect of practically all reading experiences; as a result, any theory which overlooks this will be insufficient.

We have built on results from psychology, artificial intelligence, and education in order to produce a functional theory of the complete reading process. The overall framework describes the set of tasks necessary for reading to be performed. Within this framework, we have developed a theory of creative reading. The theory is implemented in the ISAAC (Integrated Story Analysis And Creativity) system, a reading system which reads science fiction stories.

Read the paper:

Integrating Creativity and Reading: A Functional Approach

by Kenneth Moorman, Ashwin Ram

Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci-94), Atlanta, GA, August 1994
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/er-94-10.pdf

A Model of Creative Understanding

Although creativity has largely been studied in problem solving contexts, creativity consists of both a generative component and a comprehension component. In particular, creativity is an essential part of reading and understanding of natural language stories. We have formalized the understanding process and have developed an algorithm capable of producing creative understanding behavior. We have also created a novel knowledge organization scheme to assist the process. Our model of creativity is implemented as a portion of the ISAAC (Integrated Story Analysis And Creativity) reading system, a system which models the creative reading of science fiction stories.

Read the paper:

A Model of Creative Understanding

by Kenneth Moorman, Ashwin Ram

Twelvth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-94), Seattle, WA, August 1994
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/er-94-04.pdf

AQUA: Questions that Drive the Explanation Process

Editors’ Introduction:

In the doctoral disseration from which this chapter is drawn, Ashwin Ram presents an alternative perspective on the processes of story understanding, explanation, and learning. The issues that Ram explores in that dissertation are similar to those that are explored by the other authors in this book, but the angle that Ram take on these issues is somewhat different. His exploration of these processes is organized around the central theme of question asking. For him, understanding a story means identifying questions that the story raises, and questions that it answers.

Question asking also serves as a lens through which each of the sub-processes of is viewed: the retrieval of stored explanations, for instance, is driven by a library of what Ram calls “XP retrieval questions”; likewise, evaluation is driven by another set of questions, called “hypothesis verification questions”.

The AQUA program, which is Ram’s implementation of this question-based theory of understanding, is a very complex system, probably the most complex among the programs described in this book. AQUA covers a great deal of ground; it implements the entire case-based explanation process in a question-based manner. In this chapter, Ram focuses on the high-level description of the questions the programs asks, especially the questions it asks when constructing and evaluating explanations of volitional actions.

Read the paper:

AQUA: Questions that Drive the Explanation Process

by Ashwin Ram

In Inside Case-Based Explanation, R.C. Schank, A. Kass, and C.K. Riesbeck (eds.), 207-261, Lawrence Erlbaum, 1994.
www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/papers/git-cc-93-47.pdf