2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.csl.2004.08.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards situated speech understanding: visual context priming of language models

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
51
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
51
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a follow-on simulation, it moreover developed the behavior that we observed in people for Experiment 2-a greater relative priority of the immediate events over stereotypical thematic role knowledge in thematic role assignment shortly after the verb is encountered. A further computational model of spoken language comprehension suitable for modeling our findings appears to be Fuse by Roy and Mukherjee (2005). It includes a dynamic model of visual attention that enables anticipating the most likely objects in a scene based on processing of the unfolding utterance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a follow-on simulation, it moreover developed the behavior that we observed in people for Experiment 2-a greater relative priority of the immediate events over stereotypical thematic role knowledge in thematic role assignment shortly after the verb is encountered. A further computational model of spoken language comprehension suitable for modeling our findings appears to be Fuse by Roy and Mukherjee (2005). It includes a dynamic model of visual attention that enables anticipating the most likely objects in a scene based on processing of the unfolding utterance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Future research on this phenomenon will benefit greatly from combining human experimentation with the further development of explicit computational models of this kind of interaction between language and vision. As implemented models of spoken word recognition are interfaced with implemented models of visual processing (see, e.g., Roy & Mukherjee, 2005;Spivey, Grosjean, & Knoblich, 2005), we can begin to formulate a richer understanding of exactly how language comprehension and visual perception manage to interact so fluidly. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is, at the time of writing, not yet fully implemented in a robot, and as specified makes no attempt to deal with asynchronous changes to representations in different parts of the system. In other systems [13,2] binding can occur at a very early stage in processing, allowing even information from the speech signal to influence visual hypotheses for object references, and vice-versa.…”
Section: Background and Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%