MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809215328 · doi:10.1109/compsac.2018.00113

Long Short-Term Memory Neural Networks for Artificial Dialogue Generation

2018· article· en· W2809215328 on OpenAlexaff
Sid‐Ahmed Selouani, Mohamed Sidi Yacoub

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHidden Markov modelEncoderArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceSequence (biology)Recurrent neural networkTerm (time)Decoding methodsLong short term memoryArchitectureSpeech recognitionNatural language processingAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates both of user and system modeling to extend an existing corpus of human-machine dialogue data with simulated/artificial dialogues. To simulate and generate such artificial dialogues, a long-short term memory (LSTM) neural network system is proposed. The LSTM neural network is an Encoder-Decoder built on a bidirectional multilayer architecture where the input sequence to the encoder is a list of user dialogue acts and the decoder output sequence is a list of system dialogue acts. All dialogue acts are defined at the intent level and are extracted from the TownInfo corpus for tourist information provided by the FP7 CLASSiC Project funded by European Union. The proposed LSTM configuration is compared to a fully connected Hidden Markov Model (HMM) based architecture where the states are the user dialogues acts and the observations are the system dialogue acts. After carrying out different experiments, the results obtained on the TownInfo corpus showed that the LSTM-based system outperforms the HMM-based system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207