Barbara J. Grosz
Barbara J. Grosz is a person.
- (Grosz et al, 1995) ⇒ Barbara J. Grosz, Scott Weinstein, and Aravind K. Joshi. (1995). "Centering: A Framework for Modeling the Local Coherence of Discourse." In: Computational Linguistics, 21(2).
- (Grosz & Sarit, 1993) ⇒ Barbara J. Grosz, and Kraus, Sarit (1993). "Collaborative plans for group activities." In: Proceedings, IJCAI-93, Volume 1. Chambery, France, September 1993.
- (Grosz & Hirschberg, 1986) ⇒ Barbara J. Grosz, and Julia Hirschberg. (1992). "Some intonational characteristics of discourse structure." In: Proceedings, International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Volume 1. 1992.
- (Grosz & Sidner, 1986) ⇒ Barbara J. Grosz, and Candace L. Sidner. (1986). "Attention, Intentions, and the Structure of Discourse." In: Computational Linguistics, 12(3).
- Cited by ~2508 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=15483718029513061424
- ABSTRACT: In this paper we explore a new theory of discourse structure that stresses the role of purpose and processing in discourse. In this theory, discourse structure is composed of three separate but interrelated components: the structure of the sequence of utterances (called the linguistic structure), a structure of purposes (called the intentional structure), and the state of focus of attention (called the attentional state). The linguistic structure consists of segments of the discourse into which the utterances naturally aggregate. The intentional structure captures the discourse-relevant purposes, expressed in each of the linguistic segments as well as relationships among them. The attentional state is an abstraction of the focus of attention of the participants as the discourse unfolds. The attentional state, being dynamic, records the objects, properties, and relations that are salient at each point of the discourse. The distinction among these components is essential to provide an adequate explanation of such discourse phenomena as cue phrases, referring expressions, and interruptions.The theory of attention, intention, and aggregation of utterances is illustrated in the paper with a number of example discourses. Various properties of discourse are described, and explanations for the behavior of cue phrases, referring expressions, and interruptions are explored.This theory provides a framework for describing the processing of utterances in a discourse. Discourse processing requires recognizing how the utterances of the discourse aggregate into segments, recognizing the intentions expressed in the discourse and the relationships among intentions, and tracking the discourse through the operation of the mechanisms associated with attentional state. This processing description specifies in these recognition tasks the role of information from the discourse and from the participants' knowledge of the domain.
- (Grosz et al, 1983) ⇒ Barbara J Grosz, Aravind K Joshi, and Scott Weinstein. (1983). "Providing a Unified Account of Definite Noun Phrases in Discourse." In: Proceedings of the 21st annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics.
- (Grosz, 1981) ⇒ Barbara J. Grosz. (1981). "Focusing and description in natural language dialogues." In: Elements of Discourse Understanding, edited by A. Joshi, B. Webber, and I. Sag, 85--105. Cambridge University Press.
- (Grosz, 1978) ⇒ Barbara J. Grosz. (1978). "Discourse Analysis." In: Donald E. Walker, and Barbara J. Grosz, editors. "Understanding Spoken Language." Elsevier Science ISBN 0444002871
- 4. Reference
- The importance of the link between task structure and dialog structure and the need for representing focus of attention are most clearly seen when examining the use of definite noun phrases. Determining the information and processes needed to identify the object referred to by a definite expression (i.e., resolving a reference) was a primary goal of the dialog analysis. For some of the analysis it will be useful to distinguish two kinds of definite noun phrases: pronouns and nonpronomial definite noun phrases.
- (Grosz, 1977) ⇒ Barbara J. Grosz. (1977). "The representation and use of focus in dialogue understanding." Technical Report 151, SRI International