File size: 38,919 Bytes
6fa4bc9
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
{
    "paper_id": "W02-0212",
    "header": {
        "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
        "date_generated": "2023-01-19T05:15:26.389005Z"
    },
    "title": "Conditional Responses in Information-Seeking Dialogues",
    "authors": [
        {
            "first": "Elena",
            "middle": [],
            "last": "Karagjosova",
            "suffix": "",
            "affiliation": {
                "laboratory": "",
                "institution": "Saarland University",
                "location": {
                    "settlement": "Saarbr\u00fccken",
                    "country": "Germany"
                }
            },
            "email": ""
        },
        {
            "first": "Ivana",
            "middle": [],
            "last": "Kruijff-Korbayov\u00e1",
            "suffix": "",
            "affiliation": {
                "laboratory": "",
                "institution": "Saarland University",
                "location": {
                    "settlement": "Saarbr\u00fccken",
                    "country": "Germany"
                }
            },
            "email": ""
        }
    ],
    "year": "",
    "venue": null,
    "identifiers": {},
    "abstract": "The paper deals with conditional responses of the form \"Not if c/Yes if c\" in reply to a question \"?q\" in the context of information-seeking dialogues. A conditional response is triggered if the obtainability of q depends on whether c holds: The response indicates a possible need to find alternative solutions, opening a negotiation in the dialogue. The paper discusses the conditions under which conditional responses are appropriate, and proposes a uniform approach to their generation and interpretation.",
    "pdf_parse": {
        "paper_id": "W02-0212",
        "_pdf_hash": "",
        "abstract": [
            {
                "text": "The paper deals with conditional responses of the form \"Not if c/Yes if c\" in reply to a question \"?q\" in the context of information-seeking dialogues. A conditional response is triggered if the obtainability of q depends on whether c holds: The response indicates a possible need to find alternative solutions, opening a negotiation in the dialogue. The paper discusses the conditions under which conditional responses are appropriate, and proposes a uniform approach to their generation and interpretation.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Abstract",
                "sec_num": null
            }
        ],
        "body_text": [
            {
                "text": "The goal of this paper is to provide a basic account of conditional yes/no responses (CRs): We describe the conditions under which CRs are appropriate, and how these conditions translate into a uniform approach to understanding and producing CRs. 1 We focus on information-seeking dialogues between a human user and a dialogue system in the travel domain. We allow for mixed initiative and negotiation to let a dialogue be more collaborative than \"quizzing\". In this context CRs arise naturally (1).",
                "cite_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 247,
                        "end": 248,
                        "text": "1",
                        "ref_id": null
                    }
                ],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "(1) U.1: Do I need a visa to enter the U.S.?",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "S.1: Not if you are an EU citizen.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "(2) S.1': Yes, if you are not an EU citizen.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "(1:S.1) is an example of a negative CR, asserting If you're an EU citizen, then you do not need a visa to enter the U.S. An alternative, positive CR is (2:S.1'), asserting If you're not an EU citizen, then you do need a visa to enter the U.S.. In both cases, the system answers the question (1:U.1), but it makes the answer conditional on the value of a particular attribute (here, citizenship). 1 This work was done in SIRIDUS (Specification, Interaction and Reconfiguration in Dialogue Understanding Systems), EC Project IST-1999-10516 . We would like to thank Geert-Jan Kruijff for detailed discussion and comments .",
                "cite_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 396,
                        "end": 397,
                        "text": "1",
                        "ref_id": null
                    },
                    {
                        "start": 523,
                        "end": 537,
                        "text": "IST-1999-10516",
                        "ref_id": null
                    }
                ],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "Moreover, the CR suggests that, for another value, the answer may be different (2).",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "The CRs in (1:S.1) and (2:S.1') are elliptical utterances. Intuitively, they can be expanded to the complete propositions in (3) and (3 ). The material for resolving the ellipsis comes from the immediately preceding context. In the approach we work with, ellipsis is resolved with respect to the current question under discussion (QUD, (Ginzburg, 1996) ).",
                "cite_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 336,
                        "end": 352,
                        "text": "(Ginzburg, 1996)",
                        "ref_id": "BIBREF2"
                    }
                ],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "(3) No, you don't need a visa to enter the U.S. if you are an EU citizen.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "(3 ) Yes, you do need a visa to enter the U.S. if you are not an EU citizen.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "The dialogue move of a CR depends on the context. Consider (4) and (5). Similarly to (1), in (4) the system does not know an attribute-value (A/V) on which the positive or the negative answer to the yes/no question is contingent (here, whether the user wants a business or economy class flight). The system's CR (4:S.2) is a request for further information: whether the user wants a business flight (Monday is out), or does not (she is able to fly on Monday). Likewise, (4:S.2 ) is a request for further information whether the user wants an economy flight (Monday is available), or not (Monday is out).",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "Dialogue (5) is different. Now the user indicates that she is interested in a business class flight (5:U.1). The system by default assumes that this remains unchanged for another day of travel.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "What both the negative and positive CR in (5) do is to start a negotiation to either confirm or revise the user's decision for business class. The system's response (5:S.2) or (5:S.2 ) indirectly proposes a change (to economy class) to achieve the higherlevel goal of finding a flight from K\u00f6ln to Paris on Monday. If the user insists on business class, this goal cannot be achieved.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "If we want a dialogue system to understand and appropriately produce CRs, we need to describe their semantics in terms of the contextual conditions and communicative goals under which these responses occur, and the effects they have on the dialogue context. We aim at providing the basis of an account that can be implementated in the GoDiS dialogue system. GoDis is an experimental system in the travel domain, using the information-state approach to dialogue developed the TRINDI and SIRIDUS projects (Cooper et al., 1999; Lewin et al., 2000) . We focus on aspects that can improve its flexibility and functionality.",
                "cite_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 503,
                        "end": 524,
                        "text": "(Cooper et al., 1999;",
                        "ref_id": "BIBREF1"
                    },
                    {
                        "start": 525,
                        "end": 544,
                        "text": "Lewin et al., 2000)",
                        "ref_id": "BIBREF6"
                    }
                ],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "Overview. In \u00a72 we discuss the uses of positive and negative CRs in terms of their appropriateness conditions and their interpretation. In \u00a73 we discuss dialogue moves. We end the paper with conclusions.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Introduction",
                "sec_num": "1"
            },
            {
                "text": "In this section we present two different types of CRs and discuss in what contexts they are appropriate.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "CRs can be used as answers to yes/no-questions. 3 A CR does not provide a yes/no answer simpliciter, though: It provides an answer that is contingent on the value of some attribute. Consider (1). The system's reply (1:S.1) provides an answer that is contingent on the value of the citizenship attribute. If the value is (or implies) EU citizenship, the answer is negative: If the user is an EU citizen, she does not need a visa to enter the U.S.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "The CR in (1) also seems to suggest the contrapositive that if the value is \"non-EU-citizen\", the answer is positive. (2) illustrates the opposite case. We consider this additional suggestion an implicature. The assertions and implicatures that arise from CRs are summarized in Figure 1 . Green & Carberry (1999) characterize CRs in terms of the speaker's motivation to provide information \"about conditions that could affect the veracity of the response\". However, they only consider cases like (4) in which the A/V on which the CR is contingent has not yet been determined in the preceding context (or cannot be assumed). Cases like (5) where the A/V has been determined are left unnoticed. 4 We discuss each of the cases below. Not-determined A/V. The A/V on which a CR is contingent can be one that has not yet been determined in the preceding context, as in (1) and (4). We call this type of CR a non-determined A/V CR (NDCR). Besides the assertion and the implicature that answer the yes/no question as specified in Figure 1, the NDCR amounts to indirectly giving rise to the question \"whether c holds\".",
                "cite_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 289,
                        "end": 312,
                        "text": "Green & Carberry (1999)",
                        "ref_id": "BIBREF3"
                    },
                    {
                        "start": 693,
                        "end": 694,
                        "text": "4",
                        "ref_id": null
                    }
                ],
                "ref_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 278,
                        "end": 286,
                        "text": "Figure 1",
                        "ref_id": "FIGREF2"
                    },
                    {
                        "start": 1022,
                        "end": 1028,
                        "text": "Figure",
                        "ref_id": null
                    }
                ],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "Consider the user's utterances in (6) as continuations of (1). They show that the implicitly raised question cannot be answered just by \"yes\" or \"no\". Rather, it requires some content that matches with c. The responses in (6:U.2) could be interpreted as acknowledgments, but certainly not as answers to whether the user is an EU citizen. This is corroborated by the following continuation of (6:U2') where the system does answer the pending question.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "(7) S.2: Then you do (not). S.2 : Then you do (not) need a visa.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "(7:S.2) is elliptical for (7:S.2 ). Correct resolution of the ellipsis is possible only if the question whether the user needs a visa is the topmost QUD.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "The need to answer the implicitly raised question depends on what goals the participants try to achieve. \"Do I need a visa?\" in (1) is satisfactorily answered with either a yes or a no, or when enough information is provided so the asker can find out the answer herself. On the other hand, consider (8). In (8) the response is contingent on whether the user wants to fly economy class. Before flight selection can proceed further, the question whether c holds must be answered. In order to satisfy its goal of finding a flight which satisfies the user requirements, the system does need to know whether c holds to find out whether q holds. This is a difference between (8) and (1). In (1), the system's goal is merely to answer the user's question.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "To summarize, the interpretation of a CR in response to a question whether q in a context where c has not been established is that (i) it is still not determined whether q, because (ii) the answer (specified in Figure 1 ) is contingent on c, and thus (iii) the question whether c holds is implicitly raised.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 211,
                        "end": 219,
                        "text": "Figure 1",
                        "ref_id": "FIGREF2"
                    }
                ],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "As for production, it is appropriate for the system to produce a NDCR when (i) answering a yes/noquestion whether q, where (ii) the answer is either q or not-q, depending on some additional A/V c which has not yet been established in the context. We conjecture that whether a positive or a negative CR is more cooperative in a particular context depends on what the preferred answer to the question \"whether q\" is assumed to be. Contextually-determined A/V. Another context in which a CR is appropriate is when an answer to a yes/no-question is contingent on an A/V that has already been established in the preceding context, as in (5). We call this type of CR a contextuallydetermined A/V CR (CDCR).",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "What does a CDCR communicate besides the assertion and implicature that answer the question as specified in Figure 1 ? We suggested in \u00a71 that it initiates a negotiation about the already established A/V. However, this cannot happen by simply raising the question whether c holds, because c has already been established. We suggest that a CDCR implicitly proposes to consider changing the A/V: It re-raises the question whether c holds. Re-raising c differs from raising a \"new\" question at least in two aspects: c must be negotiable, and re-raising c means it cannot be answered simply by providing a sufficiently discriminative positive or negative response. To see the difference, consider (5) with (5:S.2) continued by the following utterances. Like the responses in (6), the response in (9:U.3) cannot be interpreted as answers to whether the user wants to change her mind from business to economy class. It seems hard to interpret even as acknowledgment. But then we observe a number of differences from the NDCR in (6):",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 108,
                        "end": 116,
                        "text": "Figure 1",
                        "ref_id": "FIGREF2"
                    }
                ],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "The responses in (9:U.3 ) and (9:U.3 ) are not appropriate as answers to the implicitly re-raised c, because a revision of an A/V is involved. Hence, some kind of acknowledgment of the revision is needed in addition to answering whether or not the A/V is to be revised (and how). Such acknowledgments are present in (10). In (10:U.3), 'OK' can be seen as acknowledging the revision from business to economy class. In (10:U.3 ), 'but' acknowledges the contrast between the proposed revision and the actual preservation of the A/V (here, business class). The continuation in (11), on the other hand, refuses the proposed revision only implicitly by proposing instead to check the flight possibilities on another day.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "Another observation concerning a CDCR is that it cannot immediately follow after an utterance in which the value is established, as the inappropriateness of (12:S.1) and (12:S.1 ) shows.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "Intuitively, the reason for this is that there needs to be some degree of uncertainty (in the sense of being assumed but not known to be shared) about the A/V. For example, in (5), the business class requirement is assumed to be maintained when the day is revised. The inappropriateness of (12:S.1) and (12:S.1 ) can also be explained on purely semantic grounds. When both the assertion and the implicature as specified in Figure 1 are taken into account, a contradiction arises: Given that the elliptical answer is resolved to the previous utterance, (12:S.1) asserts If user wants business class, then a business flight from SB to Paris on Sunday is not available, and implicates If user does not want business class, then a business flight from SB to Paris on Sunday is available. Similarly for (12:S.1 ).",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 423,
                        "end": 431,
                        "text": "Figure 1",
                        "ref_id": "FIGREF2"
                    }
                ],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "Thus, the interpretation of a CDCR is that (i) it is now determined whether q or not-q holds, because (ii) the answer (specified in Figure 1 ) is contingent on c and c is established. Also, (iii) the CDCR indicates the reason for the answer, and (iv) proposes to reconsider the earlier made decision by implicitly re-raising the question whether c holds, and (v) making a suggestion for it to be revised. A negotiation is started in which the conflicting A/V is either revised or confirmed. In the latter case a different solution to the overall goal must be sought.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 132,
                        "end": 140,
                        "text": "Figure 1",
                        "ref_id": "FIGREF2"
                    }
                ],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "As for production, the system may produce a CDCR when (i) answering a yes/no-question whether q, where (ii) the answer is either q or notq, depending on some A/V c which has been established in the context prior to the question whether q. Again, what polarity of CR is more cooperative in a particular context depends on what the preferred answer to the question whether q is assumed to be.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Uses of conditional responses",
                "sec_num": "2"
            },
            {
                "text": "According to the dialogue annotation scheme of (Allen and Core, 1997) , utterances in which \"the participant does not address the proposal but performs an act that leaves the decision open pending further discussion\" are called hold moves. The dialogue moves of a NDCR seem similar to hold in that the answer to q remains pending due to its contingency on an unknown A/V c. Once c is determined, q is answered. Hence, we propose to characterize a NDCR as a dialogue move combining the backward-looking function of a partial yes/noanswer and hold, and the forward-looking function of a yes/no question whether the condition holds. A CDCR is different in that it proposes to reconsider a contexually-determined c. Allen & Core provide no suitable characterization of this. We propose to characterize a CDCR as a dialogue move that combines the backward-looking function of a yes/no-answer with the forward-looking function of an alternative question whether c is preserved or revised.",
                "cite_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 47,
                        "end": 69,
                        "text": "(Allen and Core, 1997)",
                        "ref_id": "BIBREF0"
                    }
                ],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Conditional response dialogue moves",
                "sec_num": "3"
            },
            {
                "text": "We proposed an approach to dealing with conditional responses (CRs), which arise naturally in dialogues allowing for mixed initiative and negotiation. We proposed two types of CRs. One type describes the case where the answer is contingent on an attribute/value that has not yet been determined in the context (NDCRs). The other type deals with an attribute/value that has already been set in the context, and which now needs to reconsidered (CDCRs). The distinction properly clarifies the different effects on dialogue context CRs may have. We are currently developing an implementation of CRs in the GoDiS system .",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Conclusions",
                "sec_num": "4"
            },
            {
                "text": "We realize that intonation might play a role. However, given space restrictions we cannot address this issue here.Philadelphia, July 2002, pp. 84-87. Association for Computational Linguistics.Proceedings of the Third SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue,",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "",
                "sec_num": null
            },
            {
                "text": "Corpora show also occurrences of CRs in response to statements, cf..",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "",
                "sec_num": null
            },
            {
                "text": "Both cases are attested in corpora.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "",
                "sec_num": null
            },
            {
                "text": "(12) U.1: Can I fly business class from K\u00f6ln to Paris on Sunday? S.1: Not if you want business class. S.1 : Yes if you want economy class.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "",
                "sec_num": null
            }
        ],
        "back_matter": [],
        "bib_entries": {
            "BIBREF0": {
                "ref_id": "b0",
                "title": "Draft of damsl: Dialogue Act Markup in Several Layers",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "James",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Allen",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Mark",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Core",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 1997,
                "venue": "",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "James Allen and Mark Core. 1997. Draft of damsl: Dialogue Act Markup in Several Layers.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF1": {
                "ref_id": "b1",
                "title": "Coding Instructional Dialogue for Information States",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "Robin",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Cooper",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Staffan",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Larsson",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Colin",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Matheson",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Massimo",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Poesio",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "David",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Traum",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 1999,
                "venue": "",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Robin Cooper, Staffan Larsson, Colin Matheson, Massimo Poe- sio, and David Traum. 1999. Coding Instructional Dialogue for Information States. http://www.ling.gu.se/projekt/trindi/, February.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF2": {
                "ref_id": "b2",
                "title": "Interrogatives: Questions, Facts and Dialogue",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "Jonathan",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Ginzburg",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 1996,
                "venue": "The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "385--422",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Jonathan Ginzburg. 1996. Interrogatives: Questions, Facts and Dialogue. In Shalom Lappin, editor, The Handbook of Con- temporary Semantic Theory, pages 385-422. Blackwell, Ox- ford, UK/Cambridge, USA.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF3": {
                "ref_id": "b3",
                "title": "A Computational Mechanism for Initiative in Answer Generation. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "Nancy",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Green",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Sandra",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Carberry",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 1999,
                "venue": "",
                "volume": "9",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "93--132",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Nancy Green and Sandra Carberry. 1999. A Computational Mechanism for Initiative in Answer Generation. User Mod- eling and User-Adapted Interaction, 9(1/2):93-132.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF4": {
                "ref_id": "b4",
                "title": "An Analysis of Conditional Responses in Dialogue",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "Elena",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Karagjosova",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Ivana",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Kruijff-Korbayov\u00e1",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 2002,
                "venue": "Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on TEXT, SPEECH and DIALOGUE",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Elena Karagjosova and Ivana Kruijff-Korbayov\u00e1. 2002. An Analysis of Conditional Responses in Dialogue. In Proceed- ings of the 5th International Conference on TEXT, SPEECH and DIALOGUE, Brno, Czech Republic. forthcoming.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF5": {
                "ref_id": "b5",
                "title": "Enhancing collaboration with conditional responses in information seeking dialogues",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "Ivana",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Kruijff-Korbayov\u00e1",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Elena",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Karagjosova",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Staffan",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Larsson",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 2002,
                "venue": "",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Ivana Kruijff-Korbayov\u00e1, Elena Karagjosova, and Staffan Lars- son. 2002. Enhancing collaboration with conditional re- sponses in information seeking dialogues. Under review.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF6": {
                "ref_id": "b6",
                "title": "Siridus System Architecture and Interface Report",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "C",
                        "middle": [
                            "J"
                        ],
                        "last": "Ian Lewin",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Jim",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Rupp",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "David",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Hieronymus",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Staffan",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Milward",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "Alexander",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Larsson",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "",
                        "middle": [],
                        "last": "Berman",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 2000,
                "venue": "",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Ian Lewin, C.J.Rupp, Jim Hieronymus, David Milward, Staffan Larsson, and Alexander Berman. 2000. Siridus System Architecture and Interface Report (Baseline). http://www.ling.gu.se/projekt/siridus/.",
                "links": null
            }
        },
        "ref_entries": {
            "FIGREF0": {
                "text": "2 (4) U.1: A flight from K\u00f6ln to Paris on Sunday. S.1: I'm sorry, there are no flights from K\u00f6ln to Paris on Sunday. U.2: Can I fly on Monday? S.2: Not if you want business class. S.2 : Yes, if you want economy class. (5) U.1: I want a business class flight from K\u00f6ln to Paris on Sunday. S.1: I'm sorry, there are no business flights from K\u00f6ln to Paris on Sunday. U.2: Can I fly on Monday? S.2: Not if you want business class. S.2 : Yes, if you want economy class.",
                "type_str": "figure",
                "num": null,
                "uris": null
            },
            "FIGREF1": {
                "text": "(6) U.2: Yes. | No. U.2 : Yes, I am. | No, I am not. U.2 : Yes, I have German citizenship. | No, I have Czech citizenship.",
                "type_str": "figure",
                "num": null,
                "uris": null
            },
            "FIGREF2": {
                "text": "not-c, then q Possibly, if not-c, then not-q Patterns of conditional responses",
                "type_str": "figure",
                "num": null,
                "uris": null
            },
            "FIGREF3": {
                "text": "(9) U.3: Yes. | No. U.3 : Yes, I do. | No, I don't. U.3 : Yes, I want business class. | No, I don't want business class. (10) U.3: OK, I can fly economy. U.3 : But I do want business class. (11) U.3: How about Tuesday?",
                "type_str": "figure",
                "num": null,
                "uris": null
            }
        }
    }
}