• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
SRI logo
  • About
    • Press room
    • Our history
  • Expertise
    • Advanced imaging systems
    • Artificial intelligence
    • Biomedical R&D services
    • Biomedical sciences
    • Computer vision
    • Cyber & formal methods
    • Education and learning
    • Innovation strategy and policy
    • National security
    • Ocean & space
    • Quantum
    • QED-C
    • Robotics, sensors & devices
    • Speech & natural language
    • Video test & measurement
  • Ventures
  • NSIC
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • 日本支社
Search
Close
Publication December 1, 1986 Journal Article

Inferring Domain Plans In Question-Answering

Abstract

The importance of plan inference in models of conversation has been widely noted in the com-putational-linguistics literature, and its incorporation in question-answering systems has enabled a range of cooperative behaviors. The plan inference process in each of these systems, however, has assumed that the questioner (Q), whose plan is being inferred, and the respondent (R), who is drawing the inference, have identical beliefs about the actions in the domain. I demonstrate that this assumption is too strong and that it often results in failure not only of the plan-inference process, but also of the communicative process that plan inference is meant to support. In particular, it precludes the principled generation of appropriate responses to queries that arise from invalid plans. I present a model of plan inference in conversation that distinguishes between the beliefs of the questioner and the beliefs of the respondent. This model rests on an account of plans as mental phenomena: “having a plan?? is analyzed as having a particular configuration of beliefs and intentions. Judgments that a plan is invalid are associated with particular discrepancies between the beliefs that R ascribes to Q, when R believes that Q has some particular plan, and the beliefs that R herself holds. I define several types of invalidities from which a plan may suffer, relating each to a particular type of belief discrepancy, and show that the types of any invalidities judged to be present in the plan underlying a query can affect the context of a cooperative response. The plan inference model has been implemented in SPIRIT, a System for Plan Inference that Reasons about Invalidities Too, which reasons about plans underlying queries in the domain of computer mail.

↓ Download

Share this

How can we help?

Once you hit send…

We’ll match your inquiry to the person who can best help you.

Expect a response within 48 hours.

Career call to action image

Make your own mark.

Search jobs

Our work

Case studies

Publications

Timeline of innovation

Areas of expertise

Institute

Leadership

Press room

Media inquiries

Compliance

Careers

Job listings

Contact

SRI Ventures

Our locations

Headquarters

333 Ravenswood Ave
Menlo Park, CA 94025 USA

+1 (650) 859-2000

Subscribe to our newsletter


日本支社
SRI International
  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
  • DMCA
  • Copyright © 2022 SRI International