2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.specom.2008.03.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automating spoken dialogue management design using machine learning: An industry perspective

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
50
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
50
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, it should be acknowledged that the philosophy of this statistical approach to dialogue system design has been questioned by some industryfocussed practitioners on the grounds that it is inconsistent with the need to provide guarantees to service providers regarding specific system behaviours (Paek and Pieraccini, 2008). This is certainly a legitimate concern.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, it should be acknowledged that the philosophy of this statistical approach to dialogue system design has been questioned by some industryfocussed practitioners on the grounds that it is inconsistent with the need to provide guarantees to service providers regarding specific system behaviours (Paek and Pieraccini, 2008). This is certainly a legitimate concern.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There exists a reduced number of context-aware speech interfaces in the literature and they are usually applied to very specifi domains [114,129]. In our proposal we merge context-awareness with speech interfaces in order to obtain fully accessible and personalized web services and information in hand-held devices.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, estimating the user model and the reward function is a significant challenge since these model components have a direct impact on the optimized dialogue strategy. Furthermore, the reward function is perhaps the most hand-crafted aspect of the optimization frameworks such as (PO)MDPs (Paek and Pieraccini, 2008). Using inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) techniques, a reward function can be determined from expert actions (such as caregiver actions) (Ng and Russell, 2000).…”
Section: Objectivementioning
confidence: 99%