Dialogue Game Research Articles

Um coração que pulsa fora do corpo: imagens passionais nas cartas de Frida Kahlo

http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/1984-8412.2016v13n1p1104Entre os anos 30 e 40 do século passado, o México viu surgir, das cinzas da revolução mexicana, uma figura singular. Frida Kahlo é descrita, até hoje, pelo imaginário social – em seus quadros, em suas fotografias – como uma mulher que marcou uma época e que se tornou símbolo de lutas, e isso se estende até a contemporaneidade. Criaram-se, em volta da pintora mexicana, várias imagens sociais que eram delineadas no jogo dialógico entre suas obras e seus interlocutores. Tomando como referência essas assertivas, o artigo, ora apresentado, objetiva realizar análise de uma carta escrita por Frida para um de seus interlocutores amados/amantes – um dos homens com quem ela se envolveu, afetivamente, durante períodos diferentes de sua vida –, e mapear os ethé construídos por ela em enunciados nos quais ela ‘pinta’ verbalmente uma imagem de si, que se revela nas escolhas lexicais empreendidas para falar de amor, de traição, de amizade, de dor e de seu estar no mundo. Diante disso, refinamos uma imagem estética e ideológica de Frida Kahlo que se recobre de passionalidades distintas e de graus dialógicos diversos. Para tanto, fundamenta nossa análise os pressupostos teóricos advindos de M. Bakhtin, sobre estilo e enunciado concreto, e de Maingueneau, sobre ethos discursivo no que concerne à construção da imagem de si.

A cidade invisível, de Calvino: os modos de organizar e visibilizar o vivível

resumo Este artigo sobre a obra de Calvino (1923-1985), As cidades invisíveis, realiza-se sob a premissa de que o jogo combinatório criativo enfatiza as distinções e diversidades do vivível. As faces do narrar sugerem a difícil, mas não impossível, trama do viver em sociedade. Desse modo, o texto apoia atitudes dialógicas nas leituras de palavra e mundo e disputa espaços no interior das denominações de realismo fantástico na pós-modernidade. Nesse espaço, o texto não se apresenta como modelo, mas sim como investigação percuciente das facetas de um poliedro social. O jogo dialógico montado por Calvino produz suas ênfases a partir da organização semiótica. Busca-se, aqui, uma análise intertextual (no interior dos signos-cidades) com forte interesse na metodologia de trabalho do autor. O ensaio privilegia o uso do texto no original italiano de 1972.

Proof and Dialogue in Aristotle

Jan Łukasiewicz’s analysis of Aristotle’s syllogism drew attention to the nature of syllogisms as conditionals rather than premise-conclusion arguments. His further idea that syllogisms should be understood as theorems of an axiom system seems a step too far for many logicians. But there is evidence to suggest that Aristotle’s syllogism was to regularise some of the steps made in ‘dialogue games.’ This way of seeing the syllogism is explored in the framework of modern formal dialogue systems. A modern formal syllogistic game, DLSyll, is set out and analysed in use.

Het formaliseren van kritische discussie ter voorbereiding op geautomatiseerde argumentatieanalyse

Abstract The formalisation of critical discussion in preparation of automated argumentation analysis In contribution to the research on the intersection of argumentation theory and computer science, in this paper a formal approximation is developed of the discussion model that is at the core of the pragma-dialectical analytical method. The aim of the project is to prepare a foundation for the development of software to support the pragma-dialectical analysis of texts. The formal approximation takes the form of a dialogue game for critical discussion. The dialogue game is systematically developed by starting from a simplified foundation to which more complexity is cumulatively added. In the current paper a basic dialogue game for critical discussion is presented to serve as the simplified foundation. After an introduction of the overarching research project, the simplifications are explained that form the starting point of the basic dialogue game. Next, the dialogue game rules for starting and ending a dialogue are specified, as well as the rules for the available moves, the sequences in which these can be made, and the resulting commitments. Finally, the dynamics of the basic dialogue game are illustrated by visualising the sequential structure, and by discussing an example dialogue in accordance with the rules.

Supporting Argumentation Schemes in Argumentative Dialogue Games

Abstract This paper reports preliminary work into the exploitation of argumentation schemes within dialogue games. We identify a property of dialogue games that we call “scheme awareness” that captures the relationship between dialogue game systems and argumentation schemes. Scheme awareness is used to examine the ways in which existing dialogue games utilise argumentation schemes and consequently the degree with which a dialogue game can be used to construct argument structures. The aim is to develop a set of guidelines for dialogue game design, which feed into a set of Dialogue Game Description Language (DGDL) extensions in turn enabling dialogue games to better exploit argumentation schemes.

A Recursive Dialogue Game for Personalized Computer-Aided Pronunciation Training

Learning languages in addition to the native language is very important for all people in the globalized world today, and computer-aided pronunciation training (CAPT) is attractive since the software can be used anywhere at any time, and repeated as many times as desired. In this paper, we introduce the immersive interaction scenario offered by spoken dialogues to CAPT by proposing a recursive dialogue game to make CAPT personalized. A number of tree-structured sub-dialogues are linked sequentially and recursively as the script for the game. The system policy at each dialogue turn is to select in real-time along the dialogue the best training sentence for each specific individual learner within the dialogue script, considering the learner's learning status and the future possible dialogue paths in the script, such that the learner can have the scores for all pronunciation units considered reaching a predefined standard in a minimum number of turns. The purpose here is that those pronunciation units poorly produced by the specific learner can be offered with more practice opportunities in the future sentences along the dialogue, which enables the learner to improve the pronunciation without having to repeat the same training sentences many times. This makes the learning process for each learner completely personalized. The dialogue policy is modeled by Markov decision process (MDP) with high-dimensional continuous state space, and trained with fitted value iteration using a huge number of simulated learners. These simulated leaners have the behavior similar to real learners, and were generated from a corpus of real learner data. The experiments demonstrated very promising results and a real cloud-based system is also successfully implemented.

A Curious Dialogical Logic and its Composition Problem

Dialogue games are two-player logic games between a Proponent who puts forward a logical formula A as valid or true and an Opponent who disputes this. An advantage of the dialogical approach is that it is a uniform framework from which different logics can be obtained through only small variations of the basic rules. We introduce the composition problem for dialogue games as the problem of resolving, for a set S of rules for dialogue games, whether the set of S-dialogically valid formulas is closed under modus ponens. Solving the composition problem is fundamental for the dialogical approach to logic; despite its simplicity, it often requires an indirect solution with the help of significant logical machinery such as cut-elimination. We give a set N of dialogue rules that is quite close to a set of rules known to characterize classical propositional logic, and which is evidently well-justified from the dialogical point of view, but whose set of dialogically valid formulas is quite peculiar (and non-trivial). Its peculiarity notwithstanding, the composition problem for N can be solved directly.

From Dialogue Games to m-ThinkLets

The authors present an integrated overview and extension of a conversational approach to support analysis and design of goal-driven and focused interaction between stakeholders and facilitators, to be specifically applied in collaborative modeling. Complementary to ‘collaborative diagram drawing’ approaches, the authors provide more focused and accessible, wizard-like or even game-like conceptualization support. This work is rooted in theory as well as (study of) industrial practice. Ideas developed in over half a decade, as well as some new concepts, are coherently presented, centering on the notion of ‘Dialogue Games’. The approach is brought under the umbrella of the ‘ThinkLet’ approach from Collaboration Engineering, and is positioned as a specialization thereof, aiming to fit the specific needs and features of collaborative modeling.

Measuring and analyzing agents’ uncertainty in argumentation-based negotiation dialogue games

Nowadays, multiagent systems have become a widely used technology in everyday life, and many authors have adopted the view of communication or interaction between agents as a joint activity regulated by means of dialogue games. Dialogue games are a set of communication rules that agents can combine in their complex interactions. In these games, uncertainty is an important problem that each agent faces when making decisions, especially in the absence of enough information. This paper focuses on the uncertainty in a particular type of dialogue games, namely argumentation-based negotiation. There exist several proposals on this type of dialogue games in the literature, and most of them are concerned with proposing protocols to show how agents can communicate with each other, and how arguments and offers can be generated, evaluated and exchanged. Nevertheless, none of them is directly targeting the agents’ uncertainty about the exchanged arguments and how this uncertainty could be measured at each dialogue step to assist those agents make better decisions. The aim of this paper is to tackle this problem by defining a new set of uncertainty measures in negotiation dialogue games from an external agent’s point of view. In particular, we introduce two types of uncertainty: Type I and Type II. Type I is about the uncertainty index of playing the right move. For this, we use Shannon entropy to measure: (i) the uncertainty index of the agent that he is selecting the right move at each dialogue step; and (ii) the uncertainty index of participating agents in the negotiation about the whole dialogue. This is done in two different ways; the first is by taking the average of the uncertainty index of all moves, and the second is by determining all possible dialogues and applying the general formula of Shannon entropy. Type II is about the uncertainty degree of the agent that the move will be accepted by the addressee. In this context, we introduce a new classification for the arguments based on their certainty to be accepted by the addressee.

First-Order Dialogical Games and Tableaux

We present a new proof of soundness/completeness of tableaux with respect to dialogical games in Classical First-Order Logic. As far as we know it is the first thorough result for dialogical games where finiteness of plays is guaranteed by means of what we call repetition ranks.

Strategies for question selection in argumentative dialogues about plans

In this article, we present a proposal to enable agents to discuss the suitability of plans based on an argumentation scheme and associated critical questions. Agents coordinate their beliefs, intentions and preferences using a dialogue game based on this argumentation scheme and its critical questions. The detail encompassed by the argumentation scheme means that there is a large number of critical questions, and so dialogues may in principle be very lengthy. To improve the efficiency of dialogues, we present two strategies for selecting questions. We have implemented the system and, here, presented results showing how both strategies are effective in reducing the number of questions required to reach agreement, although their relative effectiveness is dependent on characteristics of the problem domain.

Dialogue games for Dishkant’s quantum modal logic

Recently some elaborations were made concerning the game theoretic semantic of $\L_{\aleph_0}$ and its extension. In the paper this kind of semantics is developed for Dishkant’s quantum modal logic $\L$Q which is also, in fact, the specific extension of $\L_{\aleph_0}$. As a starting point some game theoretic interpretation for the S$\L$ system (extending both $\L$ukasiewicz logic $\L_{\aleph_0}$ and modal logic S5) was exploited which has been proposed in 2006 by C. Fermuller and R. Kosik. They, in turn, based on ideas already introduced by Robin Giles in the 1970th to obtain a characterization of $\L_{\aleph_0}$ in terms of a Lorenzen style dialogue game combined with bets on the results of binary experiments that may show dispersion.

Proving Propositional Tautologies in a Natural Dialogue

The paper proposes a dialogue system LND which brings together and unifies two traditions in studying dialogue as a game: the dialogical logic introduced by Lorenzen; and persuasion dialogue games ...

A domain specific language for describing diverse systems of dialogue

This paper introduces the Dialogue Game Description Language (DGDL), a domain specific language for describing dialectical games. Communication is an important topic within agent research and is a fundamental factor in the development of robust and efficient multiagent systems. Similarly, argumentation has been recognised as a key component of an agentʼs ability to make decisions using complex, dynamic, uncertain, and incomplete knowledge. Dialectical games, a type of multi-player argumentative dialogue game, provide a mechanism for communication which incorporates argumentative behaviours. However there are very few tools for working with these games and little agreement over how they should be described, shared, and reused. The DGDL provides a grammar for determining whether a game description is syntactically correct and thus provides a foundation for new tools to support the future development and wider exploitation of dialectical games.

The prosody of focus in the Spanish of Quechua-Spanish bilinguals: A case study on noun phrases

This study examines the prosody of focus in the Spanish of 16 Quechua-Spanish bilinguals near Cusco, Peru. Data come from a dialogue game that involved noun phrases consisting of a noun and an adjective. The questions in the game elicited broad focus, contrastive focus on the noun (non-final position) and contrastive focus on the adjective (final position). The phonetic analysis in Praat included peak alignment, peak height, local range and duration of the stressed syllable and word. The study revealed that Cusco Spanish differs from other Spanish varieties. In other Spanish varieties, contrastive focus is marked by early peak alignment, whereas broad focus involves a late peak on the non-final word. Furthermore, in other Spanish varieties contrastive focus is indicated by a higher F0 maximum, a wider local range, post-focal pitch reduction and a longer duration of the stressed syllable/word. For Cusco Spanish no phonological contrast between early and late peak alignment was found. However, peak alignment on the adjective in contrastive focus was significantly earlier than in the two other contexts. For women, similar results were found for the noun in contrastive focus. An additional prominence-lending feature marking contrastive focus concerned duration of the final word. Furthermore, the results revealed a higher F0 maximum for broad focus than for contrastive focus. The findings suggest a prosodic change, which is possibly due to contact with Quechua. The study contributes to research on information structure, prosody and contact-induced language change.

Multi-party Dialogue Games for Dialectical Argumentation

This paper concerns a distributed argumentation system where different agents are equipped with argumentative knowledge base (henceforth referred as KB) within which conflict arguments are represented using attacking relations. This paper proposes the notion of “defensibility” of an argument in a distributed argumentation system and a multi-party dialogue game to compute the defensibility of an argument. In our multi-party dialogue game framework, we have proposed the notion of critical factor, legal move function and critical countermeasure, which act as the mechanism for avoiding idle attack and invalid attack in the course of dialogue games. Theoretically, the paper has also proved the soundness and completeness of multi-party dialogue games conducted by legal move and countermeasure function. It is anticipated that this research will contribute to argumentation research in MAS.

A dialogue game for analysing group model building: framing collaborative modelling and its facilitation

This paper concerns a specific approach to analysing and structuring operational situations in collaborative modelling. Collaborative modelling is viewed here as ‘the goal-driven creation and shaping of models that are based on the principles of rational description and reasoning’. Our long term goal is to use this analysis as a basis for improvement of collaborative modelling and the development of dedicated interactive support environments. We focus on a specific, established flavour of collaborative modelling called group model building (GMB), rooted in system dynamics. GMB is the collaborative modelling of causal relations and feedback loops, and aims for the understanding of the complex influences among system variables in some system. We discuss our theoretical approach to the systematic analysis and framing of collaborative modelling as dialogue games. We then present an evaluated prototype of a dialogue game for analysing GMB: an operational framing of constrained and guided GMB conversations.

Argument-based approach to computer system safety engineering

Safety case development is not a post-development activity, rather it should occur throughout the system development lifecycle. The key components in a safety case are safety arguments. Too often, safety arguments are constructed without proper reasoning. Inappropriate reasoning in safety arguments could undermine a system's safety claims, which in turn contributes to safety-related failures of the system. To address this, we argue that informal logic argument schemes have important roles to play in safety arguments construction and review process. Ten commonly used reasoning schemes in computer system safety domain are proposed against the safety engineering literature. The role of informal logic dialogue games in computer system safety arguments reviewing is also discussed and a dialectical model for safety argument review is proposed. It is anticipated that this work will contribute toward the development of computer system safety arguments, and help to move forward the interplay between research in informal logic and research in computer system safety engineering.

Argument Schemes in Computer System Safety Engineering

Safe Safety arguments are key components in a safety case. Too often, safety arguments are constructed without proper reasoning. To address this, we argue that informal logic argument schemes have important roles to play in safety argument construction and reviewing process. Ten commonly used reasoning schemes in computer system safety domain are proposed. The role of informal logic dialogue games in computer system safety arguments reviewing is also discussed and the intended work in this area is proposed. It is anticipated that this work will contribute toward the development of computer system safety arguments, and help to move forward the interplay between research in informal logic and research in computer system safety engineering.

Informal logic dialogue games in human–computer dialogue

AbstractInformal logic (IL) is an area of philosophy rich in models of communication and discourse with a heavy focus on argument and ‘dialogue games’. Computational dialectics is a maturing strand of research that is focused on implementing these dialogue games. The aim of this paper is to review research on applying IL dialogue games into human–computer dialogue design. We argue that IL dialogue games tend to have a number of attractive properties for human computer dialogue and that their computational utilization in this area has been increasing recently. Despite the strength of the case for IL, a number of important barriers need to be overcome if the potential of IL is to be fulfilled. These barriers are examined and means of overcoming them discussed.