Applied artificial intelligence technology for using natural language processing to train a natural language generation system with respect to date and number textual features

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11334726
  • Patent Number
    11,334,726
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, June 18, 2019
    5 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, May 17, 2022
    2 years ago
  • CPC
    • G06F40/56
    • G06F40/253
    • G06F40/295
    • G06F40/30
    • G06N20/00
  • Field of Search
    • US
    • 704 009000
    • CPC
    • G06F40/56
    • G06F40/30
    • G06F40/253
    • G06F40/295
    • G06N20/00
  • International Classifications
    • G06F40/56
    • G06N20/00
    • G06F40/30
    • G06F40/253
    • G06F40/295
    • Disclaimer
      This patent is subject to a terminal disclaimer.
      Term Extension
      186
Abstract
Disclosed herein is computer technology that applies natural language processing (NLP) techniques to training data to generate information used to train a natural language generation (NLG) system to produce output that stylistically resembles the training data. In this fashion, the NLG system can be readily trained with training data supplied by a user so that the NLG system is adapted to produce output that stylistically resembles such training data. In an example, an NLP system detects a plurality of linguistic features in the training data. These detected linguistic features are then aggregated into a specification data structure that is arranged for training the NLG system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data. Parameters in the specification data structure can be linked to objects in an ontology used by the NLG system to facilitate the training of the NLG system based on the detected linguistic features.
Description
INTRODUCTION

There is an ever-growing need in the art for improved natural language generation (NLG) technology. However, one of the challenges for developing a robust NLG system as a platform that is to be used by many different users is that each user may have different stylistic preferences regarding how content should be presented in NLG output. For example, Company A and Company B may both use the same underlying NLG technology to produce performance reports about its salespeople, but each may have different stylistic preferences for such reports. However, configuring the NLG system to differentiate its stylistic output for different users is a challenging task technologically.


As a technical advance in the art, the inventors disclose the use of natural language processing (NLP) techniques that are applied to training data to generate information used to train an NLG system to produce output that stylistically resembles the training data. In other words, the NLP techniques discussed herein permit an NLG system to be trained via automated learning techniques in a manner that will satisfy a user who wants the NLG system to “write like me”.


NLG is a subfield of artificial intelligence (AI) concerned with technology that produces language as output on the basis of some input information or structure (e.g., where the input constitutes data about a situation to be analyzed and expressed in natural language).


NLP is a subfield of AI concerned with technology that interprets natural language inputs, and natural language understanding (NLU) is a subfield of NLP concerned with technology that draws conclusions on the basis of some input information or structure.


A computer system that trains an NLG system to flexibly produce style-specific natural language outputs needs to combine these difficult areas of NLG and NLP/NLU so that the system not only understands the deeper meanings and styles that underlie the training data but also is able to translate these stylistic understandings and meanings into a configuration that is usable by the NLG system. The inventors disclose herein a number of technical advances with respect to the use of NLP technology to train an NLG system.


For example, the inventors disclose an NLP system that is able to detect a plurality of linguistic features in the training data, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of words arranged in a natural language. These detected linguistic features are then aggregated into a specification data structure that is arranged for training an NLG system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data. This specification data structure can comprise a machine-readable representation of the detected linguistic features. Parameters in the specification data structure can be linked to objects in an ontology used by the NLG system to facilitate the training of the NLG system based on the detected linguistic features.


The detected linguistic features can include numeric styles in the training data as well as date and number textual expressions in the training data. Examples of such linguistic features include decimal precision features, decimal separator features, digit grouping delimiter features, currency symbol features, day expressions features, month expression features, currency expressions features, and numeric expressions features.


The detected linguistic features can also include ontological vocabulary derived from the training data. Such ontological vocabulary can be used to train the NLG system to use expressions for ontological objects known by the NLG system that match up with how those ontological objects are expressed in the training data.


In a particularly powerful example embodiment discussed herein, the detected linguistic features can include concept expression templates that model how a concept is expressed in the training data. Examples of concepts that can be modeled in this fashion from the training data include change concepts, compare concepts, driver concepts, and rank concepts. In an example embodiment, to detect and extract such concept expression templates from the training data, the training data can be scanned for the presence of one or more anchor words, where each anchor word is associated with a concept understood by the system. If an anchor word is present in the training data, the system can then process the training data to extract an expression template that models how the concept associated with the present anchor word is discussed in the training data. NLP parsing can be applied to the training data and linkages to NLG ontologies can be employed to facilitate this concept expression template extraction.


Further still, the inventors disclose how user interfaces can be employed that permit a user to selectively control which of the detected linguistic features will be used to train the NLG system. Such user interfaces can also permit users to create concept expression templates “on the fly” in response to text inputs from the user (e.g., where a user types in a sentence from which a concept expression template is to be extracted).


Through these and other features, example embodiments of the invention provide significant technical advances in the NLP and NLG arts by harnessing computer technology to improve how natural language training data is processed to train an NLG system for producing natural language outputs in a manner that stylistically resembles the training data.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 discloses an example AI computer system in accordance with an example embodiment.



FIG. 2 discloses an example process flow for NLP-based training of an NLG system.



FIG. 3 shows an example process flow for extracting linguistic features from training data and aggregating the extracted linguistic features into a specification data structure.



FIG. 4A discloses an example process flow for entity identification in support of NLP in accordance with an example embodiment.



FIG. 4B discloses an example prefix tree that can be used for identifying entities in training data.



FIG. 5 shows an example process flow for detecting and extracting concept expression templates from training data.



FIGS. 6A-6D show examples of parse tree structures at various stages of the FIG. 5 process flow.



FIG. 6E shows an example process flow for transforming and/or tagging tokens in a parse tree with NLG-compatible labels.



FIG. 7 shows another example schematic for end-to-end detection and extraction of concept expression templates from training data.



FIGS. 8A-8I show examples of parse tree structures and other text examples at various stages of the FIG. 7 process.



FIGS. 9A-9J show examples of different portions of a specification data structure that can be produced by the NLP training system.



FIGS. 10A-10G show various example of user interfaces for controlling and operating the training system.



FIG. 10H shows an example narrative produced by the trained NLG system.



FIGS. 11A and 11B show example specification data structures that illustrate how user inputs via user interfaces can modify a base specification data structure.



FIGS. 12A and 12B show example commands for an HTTP API with respect to an example embodiment.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE EMBODIMENTS


FIG. 1 shows an example computer system 100 in accordance with an example embodiment. The computer system 100 may comprise a training data gateway 102 that links an artificial intelligence (AI) platform 104 with one or more sources of input training data such as document(s) 120, text input 122, and/or speech input 124. The training data gateway 102 then provides such information to an NLP-based training system 106 as training data 126. As an example, the training data gateway 102 can receive an upload of one or more documents 120, where the document(s) 120 serve as training data 126. The training data gateway 102 can also receive user input in the form of text 122 (such as text input through a graphical user interface) wherein the text 122 serves as training data 126. The training data gateway 102 can also receive user input in the form of speech 124, where speech recognition is performed by the gateway 102 to convert the speech into training data 126. For example, software such as the Transcribe application available from Amazon could be employed to transcribe speech data into text data for processing. The document(s) 120, text input 122, and/or speech input 124 can take the form of unstructured data arranged as a plurality of words in a natural language format. The NLP-based training system 106 applies NLP to the training data to determine linguistic styles that are present in the training data and uses the determined linguistic styles to generate configuration data 128 that is used to train the NLG system 108 to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data 126.


To aid the NLP-based training system 106 and the NLG system 108 in their operations, the NLP-based training system 106 and the NLG system 108 can access supporting data 110. This supporting data 110 can include the ontological and project data that serves as a knowledge base for the AI platform 104.


The computer system 100 comprises one or more processors and associated memories that cooperate together to implement the operations discussed herein. The computer system 100 may also include a data source that serves as a repository of data for analysis by the AI platform 104 when processing inputs and generating outputs. These components can interconnect with each other in any of a variety of manners (e.g., via a bus, via a network, etc.). For example, the computer system 100 can take the form of a distributed computing architecture where one or more processors implement the NLP tasks described herein (see NLP-based training system 106), one or more processors implement the NLG tasks described herein (see NLG system 108). Furthermore, different processors can be used for NLP and NLG tasks, or alternatively some or all of these processors may implement both NLP and NLG tasks. It should also be understood that the computer system 100 may include additional or different components if desired by a practitioner. The one or more processors may comprise general-purpose processors (e.g., a single-core or multi-core microprocessor), special-purpose processors (e.g., an application-specific integrated circuit or digital-signal processor), programmable-logic devices (e.g., a field programmable gate array), etc. or any combination thereof that are suitable for carrying out the operations described herein. The associated memories may comprise one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage mediums, such as volatile storage mediums (e.g., random access memory, registers, and/or cache) and/or non-volatile storage mediums (e.g., read-only memory, a hard-disk drive, a solid-state drive, flash memory, and/or an optical-storage device). The memory may also be integrated in whole or in part with other components of the system 100. Further, the memory may be local to the processor(s), although it should be understood that the memory (or portions of the memory) could be remote from the processor(s), in which case the processor(s) may access such remote memory through a network interface. The memory may store software programs or instructions that are executed by the processor(s) during operation of the system 100. Such software programs can take the form of a plurality of instructions configured for execution by processor(s). The memory may also store project or session data generated and used by the system 100. The data source can be any source of data, such as one or more databases, file systems, computer networks, etc. which may be part of the memory accessed by the processor(s).


The NLP-based training system 106 can be designed to work end-to-end without any human supervision, although it should be understood that a practitioner may choose to provide a user interface that allows users to review and update the determined linguistic features before they are applied to the NLG system 108.



FIG. 2 depicts an example process flow for execution by one or more processors that implement the NLP-based training system 106. At step 200, a processor ingests the training data 126. For example, as noted, the training data 126 can take the form of a corpus of documents that are represented by files. The documents can be ingested, converted into raw text strings, and saved for use by the training system 106 (for example, in a relational database as one document per row). The same process can be followed for text inputs and speech inputs, albeit the volume of data will likely be lower in such instances. Also, if desired, multiple files can be ingested at step 200 using techniques such as multi-part, form-encoded HTTP POST.


At step 202, a processor extracts linguistic features from the ingested training data using a variety of pattern matchers and rule-based NLP heuristics, examples of which are discussed below. Using these techniques, specific linguistic features can be detected in and extracted from each document, and each document can be converted into a data structure (e.g., a JSON data structure) that contains linguistic feature metadata.


At step 204, a processor aggregates the extracted linguistic features produced from the documents at step 202 by iterating over the document-specific data structures. This can include deriving totals, percentages, grouping, and sorting, which operates to produce a specification data structure (e.g., a JSON specification data structure, which is a machine-readable description of the linguistic features extracted from the ingested training data 126.


At step 206, a user interface (e.g., a browser-based graphical user interface (GUI)) can process the specification data structure and present a user with the linguistic features discovered by steps 202 and 204. Through the user interface, the user can elect to discard any of the discovered linguistic features. In example embodiments, the user can also enter custom sentences into the user interface to add additional ontological vocabulary to the system and/or add concept expressions to the specification. However, as noted above, such user interaction can be omitted if desired by a practitioner.


At step 208, a processor configures the NLG system 108 based on the specification data structure to thereby train the NLG system 108 to produce language that stylistically resembles the training data 126. In an example embodiment, a platform-specific applicator can take the JSON specification data structure (and any user preferences) as inputs and update the appropriate configuration within the NLG system 108.


The NLG system 108 can then use the specification data structure to update its configuration information to control how it produces natural language output. In an example embodiment, the NLG system 108 can produce NLG output about a data set based on defined configurations such as parameterized communication goal statements. An example of NLG technology that can be used as the NLG system 108 is the QUILL™ narrative generation platform from Narrative Science Inc. of Chicago, Ill. Aspects of this technology are described in the following patents and patent applications: U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,374,848, 8,355,903, 8,630,844, 8,688,434, 8,775,161, 8,843,363, 8,886,520, 8,892,417, 9,208,147, 9,251,134, 9,396,168, 9,576,009, 9,697,178, 9,697,197, 9,697,492, 9,720,884, 9,720,899, and 9,977,773, 9,990,337, and 10,185,477; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/253,385 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Using Narrative Analytics to Automatically Generate Narratives from Visualization Data, filed Aug. 31, 2016), 62/382,063 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Interactively Using Narrative Analytics to Focus and Control Visualizations of Data”, filed Aug. 31, 2016), Ser. No. 15/666,151 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Interactively Using Narrative Analytics to Focus and Control Visualizations of Data”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), Ser. No. 15/666,168 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Evaluating Drivers of Data Presented in Visualizations”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), Ser. No. 15/666,192 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Selective Control over Narrative Generation from Visualizations of Data”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), 62/458,460 (entitled “Interactive and Conversational Data Exploration”, filed Feb. 13, 2017), Ser. No. 15/895,800 (entitled “Interactive and Conversational Data Exploration”, filed Feb. 13, 2018), 62/460,349 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Performing Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals and Ontologies to Generate Narrative Stories”, filed Feb. 17, 2017), Ser. No. 15/897,331 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Performing Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals and Ontologies to Generate Narrative Stories”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,350 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Determining and Mapping Data Requirements for Narrative Stories to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,359 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Story Outline Formation Using Composable Communication Goals to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG)”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,364 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Runtime Computation of Story Outlines to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG)”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,373 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Ontology Building to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG) Using Composable Communication Goals”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), Ser. No. 15/897,381 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Interactive Story Editing to Support Natural Language Generation (NLG)”, filed Feb. 15, 2018), 62/539,832 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Analysis Communication Goals”, filed Aug. 1, 2017), Ser. No. 16/047,800 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Analysis Communication Goals”, filed Jul. 27, 2018), Ser. No. 16/047,837 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on a Conditional Outcome Framework”, filed Jul. 27, 2018), 62/585,809 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Smart Attributes and Explanation Communication Goals”, filed Nov. 14, 2017), Ser. No. 16/183,230 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Smart Attributes”, filed Nov. 7, 2018), Ser. No. 16/183,270 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Narrative Generation Based on Explanation Communication Goals”, filed Nov. 7, 2018), 62/632,017 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Conversational Inferencing and Interactive Natural Language Generation”, filed Feb. 19, 2018), Ser. No. 16/277,000 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Conversational Inferencing”, filed Feb. 15, 2019), Ser. No. 16/277,003 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Conversational Inferencing and Interactive Natural Language Generation”, filed Feb. 15, 2019), Ser. No. 16/277,004 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Contextualizing Words to a Knowledge Base Using Natural Language Processing”, filed Feb. 15, 2019), Ser. No. 16/277,006 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Conversational Inferencing Using Named Entity Reduction”, filed Feb. 15, 2019), and Ser. No. 16/277,008 (entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Building a Knowledge Base Using Natural Language Processing”, filed Feb. 15, 2019); the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference. As explained in the above-referenced and incorporated Ser. No. 16/183,230 patent application, the NLG system 108 can employ a conditional outcome framework to determine the ideas that should be expressed in the narrative that is produced in response to the parameterized communication goal statement. Once the ideas have been generated by the conditional outcome framework of the NLG system 108, the NLG system can then form these ideas into a narrative using the techniques described in the above-referenced and incorporated Ser. No. 16/183,230 patent application to generate the natural language output. Through the training techniques discussed herein, this natural language output will stylistically resemble the training data by including one or more expressions that are derived from the linguistic features detected in and extracted from the training data.


I. Linguistic Features



FIG. 3 depicts an example architecture for implementing systems 202 and 204 within the training system 106. A variety of different pattern matchers can be employed to detect and extract linguistic features from the training data 126. These pattern matchers can be implemented in software code within the training system 106. In an example embodiment, the pattern matchers can employ regular expression (RegEx) pattern matching where regular expressions are used to define the patterns sought via the matching process. In example embodiments, the training system 106 can include numeric style pattern matchers 300, date and number pattern matchers 310, ontological vocabulary pattern matchers 320, and concept expressions pattern matchers 330. Examples of each of these will be discussed below. The linguistic features detected and extracted via the pattern matchers can then be aggregated into a specification data structure 370.


I(A). Numeric Styles


The numeric styles class of linguistic features is concerned with how numeric values are rendered in text. Numeric style pattern matchers 300 can detect and extract different aspects of numeric style expressed by numbers within the training data. The pattern matchers within 300 (examples of which are discussed below) can use regular expressions to define the generalized patterns sought within the training data 126 so that specific instances of the patterns can be recognized. Each pattern matcher can be run against the full text of each document within the training data 126, and the constituents of each match can be captured for aggregation into the specification data structure 370.


One or more decision precision pattern matchers 302 can be configured to determine the number of digits contained in the fractional part of a number written in decimal form. For example, the number “5.5” exhibits a single digit of decimal precision, while the number “5.539” exhibits 3 digits of decimal precision. Regular expressions can be employed to detect numbers written in decimal form, and then associated logic can be used to count how many digits are to the right of the decimal.


One or more decimal separator pattern matchers 304 can be configured to determine the character that is used by a number string to separate the integer part of the number from the fractional part of the number. For example, often times a period “.” is used to denote the decimal in a number, but sometimes other characters are used, such as a comma “,”. Regular expressions can be employed to detect numbers written in decimal form, and then associated logic can be used to determine the character being used to separate the integer and fractional portions. For example, the decimal separator pattern matcher 304 can return a period as the decimal separator if the input number is “305.59”, and it can return a comma as the decimal separator if the input number is “305,59”.


One or more digit grouping delimiter pattern matchers 306 can be configured to determine the character that is used by a number string to divide groups of integers in large integers that represent values over 1000. For example, often times a comma “,” is used to separate rightmost groupings of 3 digits in an integer, but sometimes other characters are used, such as a period “.” or white space. Regular expressions can be employed to detect the presence of large integers that represent values over 1000, and then associated logic can be used to determine the character being used to separate the integer portions in groups of 3 digits starting from the rightmost integer digit. For example, the digit grouping delimiter pattern matcher 306 can return a comma as the digit grouping delimiter if the input number is “30,000”; it can return a period as the digit grouping delimiter if the input number is “30.000”; and it can return white space as the digit grouping delimiter if the input number is “30 000”. Disambiguation techniques can be applied to distinguish between numbers that may be ambiguous as to whether they are large integers or small integers with a fractional component following a decimal. As an example, if the decimal separator character is unknown, then the number “5,536” could be interpreted as five thousand five hundred thirty six (if the decimal separator is a period) or it could be interpreted as five point five three six (if the decimal separator is a comma). Possible disambiguation options can include resolving decimal separation and digit grouping hierarchically (e.g., excluding a character found to be a decimal separator from consideration as a digit grouping delimiter), or flagging ambiguous cases for resolution via user input, etc.


One or more currency symbol pattern matchers 308 can be configured to determine the character that is used as a currency symbol within a string that expresses a currency value. Regular expressions can be employed to detect the currency values, and then associated logic can return the character used as the currency symbol (e.g., $, custom character, €, etc.).


I(B). Date and Number Expressions


The date and numbers class of linguistic features is concerned with the form of how numbers and dates are expressed in text. Date and number pattern matchers 310 can detect and extract different aspects of the formats for dates and numbers within the training data. The pattern matchers within 310 (examples of which are discussed below) can use regular expressions to define the generalized patterns sought within the training data 126 so that specific instances of the patterns can be recognized. Each pattern matcher can be run against the full text of each document within the training data 126, and the constituents of each match can be captured for aggregation into the specification data structure 370.


One or more day expressions pattern matchers 312 can be configured to determine the textual form in which days of the year are expressed (e.g., “Monday, Jan. 13 2018”, “01/13/2018”, “13/01/2018”, “Jan. 13, 2018”, etc.). Regular expressions can be employed to detect which of a set of possible day expression patterns are present within the training data.


One or more month expressions pattern matchers 314 can be configured to determine the textual form in which months of the year are expressed (e.g., “January 2018”, “Jan. 2018”, “01/2018”, etc.). Regular expressions can be employed to detect which of a set of possible month expression patterns are present within the training data.


One or more currency expressions pattern matchers 316 can be configured to determine the textual form in which currency values are expressed (e.g., “$20”, “20 USD”, “20 US Dollars”, etc.). Regular expressions can be employed to detect which of a set of possible currency expression patterns are present within the training data.


One or more numeric expressions pattern matchers 318 can be configured to determine the textual form in which integer and decimal values are expressed (e.g., “Three Thousand Eighteen”, “3018”, etc.). Regular expressions can be employed to detect which of a set of possible numeric expression patterns are present within the training data.


I(C). Ontological Vocabulary


The ontological vocabulary class of linguistic features is concerned with the words used to represent ontological entities and relationships within the training data. Different information domains might refer to the same notional entity using different lexicons (e.g., Company A might refer to sales personnel as “salespeople” while Company B might refer to sales personnel as “sales associates”). The ontological vocabulary pattern matchers 320 can use data accessible to the underlying NLG system (e.g., supporting data 110) to automatically detect ontologically-significant words, particularly nouns and verbs. For example, the ontological vocabulary pattern matchers 320 can leverage an ontology used by the NLG system 108, which can contain a rich ontology that may include human-readable labels and linguistic expression forms that span one or more domains. Other data sources that can be tapped can include data sources that contain named instances of ontological entities, as well as name attribute values related to known entities. Although specific named instances may not have any relevance to vocabulary features and NLG expressions, they can help disambiguate relationship and/or attribute words. Such data sources can be used to build a text search index that maps specific words back to their corresponding ontological entities, where the text search index is for use by the ontological vocabulary pattern matchers 320. The system can build the index by traversing all nodes in the ontology as well as all fields in the underlying data sources via a data access layer for the training system 106.


As an example, consider the following ontology:


Entity: salesperson


Expressions: salesperson, account executive


Entity: sale


Expressions: sale, transaction, auction


Relationship: sells


Participating Entities: salesperson, sale


Expressions: sells, achieves, earns


As well as the following dataset, in tabular form:


















salesperson
sales
region
year









Aaron Young
50000
East
2018



Daisy Bailey
51000
West
2018











Once the data above is loaded into the system, the ontological vocabulary pattern matchers 320 can extract vocabulary features and infer preferences from any of the following examples of unstructured text:


“In 2018, the top account executive was Tom Reynolds, with a total of 56,000”.
    • Identified: “account executive”
    • Result: Express salesperson entities as “account executive”


      “In 2018, Aaron Young achieved 50,000 transactions”
    • Identified: “Aaron Young”, “achieved”, “transactions”
    • Result: Express relationship of sales+salespeople as “achieve”



FIG. 4A discloses an example process flow for performing ontological vocabulary pattern matching. As used herein, the term “named entity” refers to any ontological or data atom that the NLP system 106 recognizes in training data. As such, it should be understood that the term named entity refers to more than just the entities that are described as part of an ontology 410 within the supporting data 110. Examples of different types of named entities can include entity types (e.g., salesperson), entity instances (e.g., John, who is an instance of a salesperson), attributes (e.g., sales, which are an attribute of a salesperson), attribute values, timeframes, relationship types, relationships, qualifiers, outcomes, entity bindings, and predicate bindings.


At step 400 of FIG. 4A, the system builds a tree structure that can be used for recognizing named entities in the training data (e.g., the sentences of a training document or other training input), for example a prefix tree. This tree can pull information from the knowledge base such as the sources shown in FIG. 4A, which may include an ontology 410, project data 412, linguistic/deictic context 414, and general knowledge 416.


The ontology 410 can be the ontology for a data set addressed by the message, an example of such an ontology is described in the above-referenced and incorporated Ser. No. 16/183,230 patent application.


The project data 412 represents the data set that serves as a project-specific knowledge base. For example, the project data 412 can be the sales data for the salespeople of a company. Thus, the project data 412 may include a number of entity instances and attribute values for the entity types and attributes of the ontology 410.


The deictic context 414 can be a data structure that maps referring terms such as pronouns and demonstratives in the training data to specific named entities in the supporting data 110. This linguistic/deictic context can help the system know how to map referring terms such as pronouns that are mentioned in the training data to specific entities that are mentioned in the training data. An example of technology that can be used to build such a linguistic/deictic context is described in (1) U.S. patent application 62/612,820, filed Jan. 2, 2018, and entitled “Context Saliency-Based Deictic Parser for Natural Language Generation and Natural Language Processing”, (2) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/233,746, filed Dec. 27, 2018, and entitled “Context Saliency-Based Deictic Parser for Natural Language Generation”, and (3) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/233,776, filed Dec. 27, 2018, and entitled “Context Saliency-Based Deictic Parser for Natural Language Processing”, the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.


The general knowledge 416 can be a data structure that identifies the words that people commonly use to describe data and timeframes (e.g., “highest”, etc.).


Step 400 can operate to read through these data sources and extract each unique instance of a named entity that is found to be present in the data sources, and build the prefix tree that allows the system to later recognize these named entities in the words of the training data and then map those named entities to elements in the ontology 410, project data 412, deictic context 414, and/or general knowledge that are understood by the system. Also, if desired by a practitioner, it should be understood that step 400 can be performed as a pre-processing step that happens before any training data is received by the NLP training system 106.



FIG. 4B shows a simple example of a prefix tree that can be built as a result of step 400. It should be understood that for many projects, the prefix tree would be much larger. In this example, it can be seen that the name “Aaron Young” was found in the knowledge base of data sources as an entity instance, the word “generate” was found in the knowledge base of data sources as an attribute of sales value, the pronoun “he” was found to be contextually relevant to the entity instance of Aaron Young, and so on for other named entities as shown by FIG. 4B. Given that the ontology 410 may include a variety of different expressions for ontological elements (as described in the above-referenced and incorporated Ser. No. 16/183,230 patent application), it should be understood that the prefix tree can be highly robust at recognizing the meaning of a large number of words within the context of a training data set. For example, expressions such as “sales”, “sells”, “deals”, “moves”, “transactions”, etc. can be linked to an attribute such as the sales of a salesperson to allow the system to recognize a wide variety of words in training data that relates to sales data. In general, it can be expected that (1) nouns will often map to entity types, entity instances, characterizations, attributes, and qualifiers, (2) verbs will often map to attributes and relationships, (3) adjectives will often map to qualifiers and characterizations, and (4) prepositions will often map to relationships; however this need not always be the case and will depend on the nature of the data sources accessed by step 400.


Then, step 402 maps words in the training data to named entities in the prefix tree. Thus, if the word “Aaron” appears in the training data, this can be recognized and mapped via the prefix tree to the entity instance of Aaron Young, and if the word “generate” appears in the training data, this can be recognized and mapped via the prefix tree to the attribute of sales value.


I(D). Concept Expressions


The concept expressions class of linguistic features is concerned with the sequence of words or phrases used in the training data to express NLG concepts. Concept expressions pattern matchers 330 can be used to infer the high level concepts that are expressed in the training data, and they thus represent a particularly powerful and innovative aspect that can be employed in example embodiments of training system 106. Examples of concepts that can be detected by pattern matchers 330 include:

    • Change: An example of a sentence that expresses a change concept is “Imports of steel fell sharply in 2018, down 43% from the previous year.”
    • Compare: An example of a sentence that expresses a compare concept is “Imports of steel were lower in 2018 than the previous year.”
    • Driver: An example of a sentence that expresses a driver concept is “New tariffs contributed to the decrease in steel imports.”
    • Rank: An example of a sentence that expresses a rank concept is “The top 3 steel exporters by volume are China, Russia, and India.”


      The concept expressions pattern matchers 330 can use metadata derived from NLP tools and a series of rule-based heuristics to identify candidates for concept expressions, ultimately producing an annotated template that can be structurally compatible with the NLG system 108.


The system can be configured to assume that all concept expressions contain an anchor word, a single or compound word that is globally unique to a particular concept. The system can then use occurrences of these anchor words to identify candidate phrases for template extraction. Examples of specific anchor words for several concepts are listed below.


For example, one or more change concept pattern matchers 332 can be configured to detect the presence of any of the following anchor words in a training sentence. Upon detection of one of these anchor words, the subject training sentence can be categorized as a candidate for a change expression and get passed to template extraction logic 350 (discussed below). Examples of anchor words for a change concept can include:

    • increase
    • reduction
    • decrease
    • decline
    • rise
    • fall
    • raise
    • lower
    • lift
    • drop
    • grow
    • shrink
    • gain
    • lose
    • up
    • down
    • improve
    • worsen
    • slump
    • upturn
    • downturn
    • gains
    • losses


As another example, one or more compare concept pattern matchers 334 can be configured to detect the presence of any of the following anchor words in a training sentence. Upon detection of one of these anchor words, the subject training sentence can be categorized as a candidate for a compare expression and get passed to template extraction logic 350 (discussed below). Examples of anchor words for a compare concept can include:

    • more
    • less
    • fewer
    • greater
    • lesser
    • higher
    • lower
    • superior
    • inferior
    • exceed


As another example, one or more driver concept pattern matchers 336 can be configured to detect the presence of any of the following anchor words in a training sentence. Upon detection of one of these anchor words, the subject training sentence can be categorized as a candidate for a driver expression and get passed to template extraction logic 350 (discussed below). Examples of anchor words for a driver concept can include:

    • drive
    • detract
    • contribute
    • aid
    • counteract
    • help
    • hurt
    • impact


As another example, one or more rank concept pattern matchers 338 can be configured to detect the presence of any of the following anchor words in a training sentence. Upon detection of one of these anchor words, the subject training sentence can be categorized as a candidate for a rank expression and get passed to template extraction logic 350 (discussed below). Examples of anchor words for a rank concept can include:

    • best
    • worst
    • top
    • bottom
    • top most
    • bottom most
    • top ranked
    • bottom ranked
    • largest
    • smallest


      However, it should be understood that more, fewer, and/or different anchor words can be used for detecting these concept candidates. For example, a thesaurus could be used to find appropriate synonyms for each of these anchor words to further expand the pools of “change”, “compare”, “driver”, and “rank” anchor words.


Furthermore, while the examples discussed herein describe “change”, “compare”, “driver”, and “rank” concepts, it should be understood that a practitioner may choose to detect other concepts that could be present within training data. For example, any of “peaks and troughs” concepts, “volatility” concepts, “correlation” concepts, “prediction” concepts, “distribution” concepts, and others can also be detected using the techniques described herein. Following below are some additional examples of concepts that can be expressed in sentences and for which concept expression templates could be extracted using the techniques described herein:

    • “Actual versus Benchmark” Concept: “The best period was Oct. when Total Likes outperformed Fan Acquisition Target Goal by 7.537.”
    • “Compound Annual Growth Rate” (CAGR) Concept: “If that growth rate were to continue, Sale Volume is forecast to be $7.34 billion by 2022.”
    • “Clusters” Concept: “When organized into groups of similar Stadiums and Capacity values, one distinct group stands out. There were 28 entities that had values of Stadiums between three and 17 and Capacity between zero and 165,910.”
    • “Concentration” Concept: “Crime Count is relatively concentrated with 60% of the total represented by 35 of the 161 entities (22%).”
    • “Correlation” Concept: “Profit and revenue had a strong positive correlation, suggesting that as one (profit) increases, so does the other (revenue), or vice versa.”
    • “Current versus Previous” Concept: “Compared to the previous year, the average across all months decreased from $92.7 million to $84.2 million.”
    • “Cyclicity” Concept: “Sale Volume experienced cyclicality, repeating each cycle about every 8.2 years.”
    • “Distribution” Concept: “The distribution is negatively skewed as the average of 4.2 million is greater than the median of 4.2 million.”
    • “Intersection” Concept: “Total Quantity was lower than Total Revenue for the first 6% of the series, but at 02/2010 Total Quantity increased above Total Revenue and remained higher for the last 94% of the series.”
    • “Min Max” Concept: “Values ranged from 54% (Easy System Chat) to 118% (Phone).”
    • “Outliers” Concept: “PASSAT and JETTA were exceptions with very high Miles Per Gallon values.”
    • “Percentage of Whole” Concept: “Over the course of the series, Honduras accounted for 15% of top keyword totals, election accounted for 9.92%, and president accounted for 8.74%.”
    • “Peak/Trough” Concept: “Total Sales had a significant dip between February-2013 ($7,125) and May-2013 ($7,417), falling to $5,430 in March-2013.”
    • “Segments” Concept: “Total Contacts Completed fluctuated over the course of the series with 60% of data points moving in an opposite direction from the previous point.”
    • “Streak” Concept: “The largest net growth was from August 2017 to December 2017, when Variable (Line) increased by 36 percentage points.”


Further still, while a single anchor word is used to assign a candidate concept classification to training sentences in the example embodiment discussed above, it should be understood that a practitioner could also use an anchor word in combination with additional metadata (such as part of speech tagging) or a combination of anchor words to infer concepts from training sentences. For example, a practitioner may conclude that the word “fewer” could be indicative of both a “change” concept and a “compare” concept, and additional words and/or rules could be used to further resolve which classification should be applied to the subject training sentence. As another example, the detection of a rank concept when the word “top” is present in the training data can be made dependent on whether “top” is being used in the subject sentence as an adjective (in which case the rank candidacy can get triggered) or as a noun (in which case the rank candidacy may not get triggered).


Once candidate phrases have been identified via the anchor word detection, the candidate phrases are then parsed and evaluated by template extraction logic 350 before producing a concept expression template. The template creation process can employ a sequence of rule-based heuristics, examples of which are discussed below. For example, FIG. 5 discloses an example process flow for template extraction. For purposes of elaboration, this FIG. 5 process flow will be discussed in the context of the following unstructured text that expresses a change concept:

    • “The United States division experienced a large drop in sales in June 2017 compared to the previous year, which prompted this meeting.”


      With this example, the change concept pattern matcher 332 will detect the anchor word “drop” in the training sentence, and the template extraction logic 350 will attempt to extract a change expression template from this training sentence.


At step 500, a processor performs constituency parsing and dependency parsing on the training sentence to create a parse tree structure. Additional details for example embodiments of constituency parsing and dependency parsing are discussed below. FIG. 6A shows an example parse tree structure that can be generated at step 500 from the example sentence above. In this example, the parse tree structure corresponds to the constituency parse tree.


At step 502, a processor identifies entities in the parse tree structure based on data sources such as an ontology. This step can be performed using named entity recognition (NER) techniques, and an example of an NER technique that can be performed on the parse tree structure of FIG. 6A is discussed above with respect to FIG. 4A. However, the NER of step 502 need not draw from the ontology 410 used by NLG system 108; instead the ontology used by the NER of step 502 can use existing ontologies that are available in combination with parsing tools that can be used at step 500. Entities that can be identified at step 502 (even if ontology 410 is not used) can include organizations, person names, dates, currencies, etc. With respect to the leaf nodes of the parse tree structure example of FIG. 6A, step 502 can recognize the following entities:

    • United States
    • June 2017
    • previous year


At step 504, a processor prunes clauses in the parse tree structure by removing clauses or phrases from the parse tree structure that do not contain relevant identified entities. For the parse tree structure of FIG. 6A, step 504 will operate to remove the right-most subordinate clause (SBAR) (“which prompted this meeting”) because this clause does not contain any entities identified at step 502. FIG. 6B shows the example parse tree structure after the pruning of step 504 has been performed.


At step 506, a processor collapses branches of the pruned parse tree structure based on relationships with identified entities. For example, step 506 can discard sibling tree nodes of any branches with known entities or attributes. With reference to the pruned parse tree structure of FIG. 6B, step 506 can operate to discard the siblings of “United States”, “June 2017”, and “the previous year” within the tree structure. FIG. 6C shows the parse tree structure after step 506 has been performed to make these removals.


At step 508, a processor parameterizes the collapsed parse tree structure to yield an NLG-compatible concept expression template. The NLG-compatible concept expression template can include semantically-significant variable slots. With respect to the running example, the following transformations can occur as part of step 508:

    • “United States” (GPE)→“ENTITY_0” (NN)—by virtue of recognition of the words “United States” as an entity.
    • “a large drop”→ANCHOR_0—by virtue of recognition of the word “drop” as an anchor word
    • “Sales” (ATTR)→ATTR_0 (NN)—by virtue of recognition of the word “sales” as being an attribute in ontology 410
    • “June 2017” (DATE)→DATE_0 (NN)—by virtue of recognition of this string as referring to a date
    • “the previous year” (DATE)→DATE_1 (NN)—by virtue of recognition of this string as referring to a date

      FIG. 6D shows the parameterized parse tree structure that can be produced by step 508. Also, the parameterization step 508 can include concept-specific rules. For example, the parameterization of a change concept can look for numeric values and then separately parameterize “from” and “to” values in a change expression. FIG. 6E shows an example process flow for transforming and/or tagging tokens in a parse tree with NLG-compatible labels.



FIG. 7 shows an end-to-end process flow for extracting concept expression templates from training data for another example embodiment. This process flow can include the following:

    • 1. Tokenizing a document into sentences
    • 2. For each sentence:
      • a. Pre-processing with a suite of NLP techniques (dependency and constituency parsing, named entity recognition)
      • b. Leveraging a user's' data and the NLG system's ontology to identify and flag known resources (entities, attributes)
    • 3. For each pre-processed sentence:
      • a. Passing the sentence through a separate pattern matcher for each concept supported by the NLG system
      • b. For each template extractor triggered by its associated pattern matcher, applying a set of heuristics to extract the relevant subtree from the parsed sentence and parameterize the sentence into a form compatible with the NLG system.


        Through this process, a raw sentence like “The United States saw a $5000 increase in sales in the cycle ending in February.” can be converted to a parameterized template of the form “$ENTITY_0 see $BY-VALUE_0 ANCHOR_0 in $ATTR_0 in $DATE_0” that can be used by the NLG system 108 to generate new sentences of a similar form. The following sections will now describe details about various aspects of the FIG. 7 embodiment.


Sentence Pre-Processing

Given an input document, the training system can first use a sentence tokenizer to split the document into sentences that are then passed on for further processing. An example of a sentence that can produced by the tokenizer is:

    • “The United States saw a $5000 increase in sales in the cycle ending in February.”


Each sentence is then passed through two NLP tools—one for constituency parsing and one for dependency parsing. An example of a tool that can be used for constituency parsing is Stanford's CoreNLP. CoreNLP can be used to generate a constituency tree for the sentence. An example of a tool that can be used for dependency parsing is Explosion AI's Spacy. Spacy can be used to generate a dependency parse and part-of-speech tags, and it can also perform named entity recognition (NER). This NER is an NLP practice that uses static dictionaries and heuristics (e.g. capitalization) to recognize and flag person names (“Aaron Young”), geopolitical entities (“United States”), dates (“February”), etc. FIG. 8A shows a basic constituency tree produced as a result of sentence pre-processing. While CoreNLP and Spacy are used for the constituency parsing and dependency parsing in an example embodiment, it should be understood that other tools can be used for these parsing operations. For example, Microsoft Azure's linguistics API may be used for constituency parsing, and tools such as CoreNLP and Google's cloud NLP tools can be used for dependency parsing if desired by a practitioner.


The system can perform both a dependency and constituency parse because they serve unique roles in the template extraction process. The dependency parse is useful for determining the linguistic roles and relationships of different tokens in the sentence (e.g. determining the preposition associated with a given numeric value, or which verb has a recognized attribute as its object). The constituency tree, on the other hand, is important for building a tree structure compatible with the NLG system 108.


The system next applies a known resource extraction process such as the one described in connection with FIG. 4A. The known resource extraction process flags tokens that are recognized as corresponding to known entities or attributes of entities. These known entities and attributes come from two sources:

    • a. The NLG system's ontology—as noted above, the ontology utilized by the NLG system can have a library of known entities, attributes, and relationships, and the extraction logic can scan sentences for any instances of tokens matching these known ontological entities. For example, “sales” is recognized concept in our ontology, so is tagged as an attribute.
    • b. User data—if a user has uploaded data or has linked the system to a database, the extraction logic can also recognize string data values in a sentence as entities or attributes. For example, if a user has a data representing product names, the known resource extractor would recognize (and thus be able to parameterize downstream) that “Gizmotron 5000” is an entity in the sentence “The best selling product was the Gizmotron 5000”, even though that term does not appear in the NLG system ontology, nor could be recognized by a standard NER.


The NLP results, extracted known resources, and raw sentence string for each sentence are set as a metadata on a node object that is passed to the template pattern matchers for further processing.


Pattern Matching to Identify Sentences Expressing a Concept

For all concepts expressible by the NLG system (e.g., “change”, “comparison”, “rank”, etc.), the training system can implement a separate pattern matcher used to identify sentences expressing that concept, as noted above in connection with FIG. 3. As previously discussed, the pattern matchers can be implemented using “anchor words”, and the system can maintain a dictionary of anchor words, stored as tuples of (positive, negative) pairs, along with part of speech. For example, a subset of anchor words for the “change” concept can include:

    • (‘increase’, Noun), (‘decrease’, Noun),
    • (‘increase’, Verb), (‘decrease’, Verb),
    • (‘grow’, Verb), (‘shrink’, Verb),
    • (‘gains’, ‘Noun’), (‘losses’, ‘Noun’),


      While tuples can be used in an example embodiment, it should be understood that other combinations could be employed to store representations of the anchor words. For example, the anchor word representations can be expanded to be triples where an additional item captures “change” relations (e.g., more, less, equal).


The “rank” concept includes “top”, “bottommost”, and “best”; the “compare” concept includes “more”, “less”; etc.


The training system thus implements a pattern matcher for each supported concept that scans the processed sentences, and is triggered any time it recognizes an anchor word/part-of-speech pair associated with the concept. Each processed sentence is passed through pattern matchers, and for each that is triggered the training system initiates the template extraction process.


Template Extraction

When the pattern matcher for a given concept is triggered, the training system attempts to templatize the triggering sentence. This involves the following steps:


1. Token Generation and Substitution


As mentioned above, each sentence is processed with both CoreNLP (for the constituency tree) and Spacy (for NER, dependencies, etc.). The first step of template extraction is to integrate the constituency tree with the Spacy token objects, replacing the leaves of the CoreNLP constituency tree with Spacy tokens and their associated metadata. For any recognized named entities (e.g. “United States” and “February” in this example), we collapse all words making up the named entity into a single leaf in the tree. FIG. 8B shows an example parse tree after this step (where “United States” and “February” are underlined to illustrate their status as recognized named entities.


2. Subtree Extraction


The next step is to extract from the complete parse tree the subtree expressing the identified concept. The default approach for this this is to move up the tree from the anchor word to the complete clause containing the anchor word. In the example of FIG. 8C, where “increased” is the anchor word, the system moves up the tree to the independent clause “whose sales increased by $7000 this quarter”, and the rest of the sentence is discarded (see FIG. 8C). This amounts to selecting the underlined portion of the parse tree shown by FIG. 8D:


This logic can be overridden for particular template extractors as appropriate. For example, the “rank” concept extractor can be designed to move up the tree to the topmost containing noun phrase (see the underlined portion in the example of FIG. 8E).


3. Clause Pruning


The training system then eliminates any clauses from the sentence that do not contain an anchor word or any known resources. In the example of FIG. 8F, this means dropping the clause “who was recently promoted” because it does mention a known resource or the anchor word (“more”). This amounts to dropping the crossed out elements in the example parse tree of FIG. 8G.


4. Known Resource/Entity Branch Collapsing


The next step is to collapse any branches containing known entity or attribute tokens (this includes both known resources extracted from the ontology or user data, or other entities recognized by NER during the initial Spacy pre-processing of the sentence). To accomplish this, the system moves up the tree from each recognized token to the highest containing noun phrase (NP) that that does not also contain an anchor word or another recognized token. For example, the initial NP (“The United States”) is collapsed to a single NP containing only the token for “United States”. The system does not collapse the NP containing “sales” beyond the bolded subtree in the example below, because the next highest NP (“a $5000 increase in sales in February”) contains an anchor word (“increase) as well as another entity (“February”). If instead the sentence had referenced “average weekly sales”, then that NP would have been collapsed to a single token NP including only “sales”. FIG. 8H shows the example parse tree after the collapsing operation is performed.


5. Parameterization


The final step is to parameterize the sentence into an abstracted form usable by the NLG system. For the template extractors, this involves replacing tokens for attributes, entities, and dates with enumerated variables (ENTITY_0, ENTITY_1, etc.). A second pass handles parameterization of concept-specific elements (in the example for “change” below, the system parameterizes the “BY-VALUE”, and could do the same for the “TO” and “FROM” values if present). The system can also parameterize the anchor word, which allows for use of the template in NLG systems with synonyms for the anchor word (e.g. “ . . . saw a dip in sales . . . ”) or its opposite (“ . . . saw a decrease in sales . . . ”). FIG. 8I shows an example parameterization of the running parse tree example. This template can then be passed directly to the NLG system, which maps the variables in the template to runtime NLG objects to generate new sentences.


Notes on Template Validation

To ensure that generated templates are syntactically and semantically valid, the system can apply multiple passes of validation throughout the parsing and templatization process. If any of these fail, the system can raise an error when processing a sentence.

    • 1. Constituency and dependency parsing is not a 100% accurate process (often due to sentence ambiguity, e.g., for the sentence “Enraged cow injures farmer with ax”, who has the ax?), so a first validation check ensures that the dependency parse and constituency parse agree with respect to part-of-speech tags.
    • 2. Each template extractor implements a custom parameter validation pass, which can ensure the set of parameterized sentence elements is valid for a given concept. For example, the “compare” concept can be designed so that it is required to contain either two entities or two attributes.
    • 3. A final validation pass performs a syntactic validity check (e.g. does the sentence contain a proper subject and object) and an NLG compatibility check (ensuring that the final tree structure is consistent with the format expected by out NLG system.


      II. Specification Data Structures


As noted above, the result of the extraction and aggregation phases is a specification data structure (such as a JSON specification), which is a machine-readable, declarative description of the linguistic features that the training system discovered. Each top-level key in the specification data structure can be a specific linguistic feature, whose value is a list of feature instances, grouped by their generalized form and sorted by frequency. Each list item contains a “count” value to indicate the number of times that generalized form was encountered. Examples of each feature's data structure in an example JSON specification are discussed below.


For example, FIG. 9A shows a portion of a JSON specification for the decimal precision linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant numeric values for the decimal precision feature, and the precision field identifies the value for the corresponding decimal precision. The FIG. 9A example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the decimal precision feature.


As another example, FIG. 9B shows a portion of a JSON specification for the decimal separator linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant numeric values for the decimal separator feature, and the separator field identifies the character used as the decimal separator for the subject count. The FIG. 9B example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the decimal separator feature.


As another example, FIG. 9C shows a portion of a JSON specification for the digit grouping delimiter linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant numeric values for the digit grouping delimiter feature, and the separator field identifies the character used as the digit grouping delimiter for the subject count. The FIG. 9C example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the digit grouping delimiter feature.


As another example, FIG. 9D shows a portion of a JSON specification for the currency symbol linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant currency values for the currency symbol feature, and the symbol field identifies the character used as the currency symbol for the subject count. The FIG. 9D example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the currency symbol feature.


As yet another example, FIG. 9E shows a portion of a JSON specification for the day expression linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant day expressions. Each feature instance contains the generalized format string used by programming languages to convert a date into a string (see “format_str” and “strftime” in FIG. 9E). The FIG. 9E example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the day expression feature.


As yet another example, FIG. 9F shows a portion of a JSON specification for the month expression linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant month expressions. Each feature instance contains the generalized format string used by programming languages to convert a month into a string (see “format_str” and “strftime” in FIG. 9F). The FIG. 9F example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the month expression feature.


As yet another example, FIG. 9G shows a portion of a JSON specification for the currency expression linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant currency expressions. Each feature instance contains several Boolean flags which describe various properties of the subject expression. The aggregation of these Boolean values can then be used to define the specific currency expression that was detected in the training data. The FIG. 9G example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the currency expression feature.


As yet another example, FIG. 9H shows a portion of a JSON specification for the numeric expression linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included relevant numeric expressions. Each feature instance contains several Boolean flags which describe various properties of the subject expression (see the “format” portions of FIG. 9H). The aggregation of these Boolean values can then be used to define the specific numeric expression that was detected in the training data. The FIG. 9H example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for the numeric expression feature.


As still another example, FIG. 9I shows a portion of a JSON specification for the ontological vocabulary linguistic feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included a relevant ontological element as identified by the “expression” field, and different counts can be included for each ontological element found in the training data. Each feature instance contains a type (“object_type”), an ID reference (“object_ID”) and an object label (“object_label”) for its corresponding ontological node in the NLG system 108. The FIG. 9I example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for subject ontological element.


As still another example, FIG. 9J shows a portion of a JSON specification for the concept expression feature discussed above. The count field identifies a count of the sentences in the training data that included a relevant concept as identified by the “concept” field, and different counts can be included for each concept found in the training data. Each concept instance can contain a representation (such as an ASCII representation) of the template data structure as well as the values corresponding to the template's parameters. Further still, each concept instance can identify the phrases and anchor words that were found to be matches to a concept within the training data. The FIG. 9J example also lists the relevant sentences in the training data for subject concept expression.


Furthermore, it should be understood that if multiple different instances of a detected linguistic feature are detected in the training data, the JSON specification can include a separate entry for each instance. The system can then choose which instance should be used for training the NLG system based on heuristics (e.g., choosing the most common instance to train) or based on user input (e.g., presenting the instances to a user as selectable options and then training the NLG system based on the user-selected instance). For example, with reference to FIG. 9A, if multiple decimal precisions were found in the training data, the JSON specification can separately identify each instance along with the count for those instances. Thus, if there were also 6 numbers in the training data where the decimal precision was 3 digits, there could be another entry in the JSON specification corresponding to this instance. The training process could then apply the most common instance (e.g., the decimal precision of 3 digits in this example) based on automated heuristics or rely on user input to decide which instance should be used for training.


III. User Interfaces


As noted above with reference to step 206, user interfaces can be provided to help a user control and review aspects of the training process. For example, a browser application can provide a user with interfaces for creating a document corpus, extracting features, and applying configuration changes to the NLG system 108.



FIG. 10A shows an example GUI for document upload to provide the training system 106 with training data. This GUI can also specify a data scenario in response to user input, wherein the specified data scenario can be a domain-specific data set such as project data used by the NLG system 108. Such a data scenario may include an ontology and project data used by the training system and the NLG system as a knowledge base. This data scenario can also define the configuration that is to be modified based on the specification data structure extracted by the training system (and possibly modified via the user interfaces).



FIG. 10B shows an example GUI that allows a user to view and select concept expression templates that were detected within the training data. Each detected concept expression template can be separately listed in the GUI, and the listing can be accompanied by information that identifies the concept type (e.g., “change” in the example of FIG. 10B) as well as an example of one of the sentences in the training data from which the concept expression template was extracted. Further still, the GUI can show the prevalence of each concept expression template within the training data (which, for the example of FIG. 10B, was 30% for the first listed template and 7% for the second listed template). Each listing in the example of FIG. 10B serves as a model for describing change that can be used by the NLG system 108, and each listing can be selectable via a checkbox or the like to control whether that concept expression template is to be added to the NLG system 108 as a configuration and preferred over default expressions. The “More sentences” link can be selected if the user wants to review additional training sentences from which the subject concept expression template was extracted. The “Show template parse tree” link can be selected to show the corresponding parse tree for the subject concept expression template (see FIG. 10C).


The GUI of FIG. 10B can also summarize the different concept expression templates that were extracted from the training data. For example, the GUI of FIG. 10B shows that 10 concept expression templates were found in the training data, of which 4 were change expressions, 1 one a compare expression, 2 were driver expressions, etc.


In a particularly powerful aspect of an example embodiment, the GUI of FIG. 10B can be used to create custom templates in response to user input (see, e.g. the “+Custom Template” button). Upon selection of this button, the GUI can include a text entry field through which the user can enter a sentence. The training system can then process this sentence to extract a concept expression template from it. The extracted concept expression template can then be presented to the user via the GUI of FIG. 10B. This feature allows for users to create concept expression templates for use by the NLG system “on the fly”. FIG. 10G discussed below further elaborates on customized template creation.



FIG. 10D shows an example GUI that allows a user to view and select the ontological vocabulary that was detected within the training data. Each detected item of ontological vocabulary can be separately listed in the GUI, and the listing can be accompanied by information that identifies the ontological object type (e.g., entity, type, attribute, etc.) as well as an example of one of the sentences in the training data from which the item of ontological vocabulary was extracted. Further still, the GUI can show the prevalence of each item of ontological vocabulary within the training data (which, for the example of FIG. 10B, was 41% for “region” and 17% for “income”). Each listing in the example of FIG. 10B can be selectable via a checkbox or the like to control whether that item of vocabulary is to be added to the NLG system 108 as a configuration and preferred over default expressions. Thus, if “region” is selected via the GUI of FIG. 10D, the word “region” can be included as the preferred expression for the subject ontological element in the ontology used by the NLG system 108. The “More sentences” link can be selected if the user wants to review additional training sentences from which the subject item of ontological vocabulary was extracted (see FIG. 10E).


The GUI of FIG. 10D can also summarize the ontological vocabulary extracted from the training data. For example, the GUI of FIG. 10D shows that 8 vocabulary words were found in the training data, of which 3 were entity words, 4 were attribute words, and 1 was a relationship word.



FIG. 10F shows an example GUI that allows a user to view and select the numeric styles, dates, and number patterns that were detected within the training data via pattern matches 300 and 310. Each category of style item can be separately listed in the GUI, and the listing can include a drop down menu that identifies the specific pattern instances of each style identified within the training data. The user can then select which of these detected instances should be used with the configuration data. For example, the drop down menu can be accessed, and the desired instance can be selected via the drop down menu to control whether that pattern instance is to be added to the NLG system 108 as a configuration and preferred over default expression patterns.


The GUI of FIG. 10F can also summarize the different styles extracted from the training data. For example, the GUI of FIG. 10F shows that 6 total styles were found in the training data, of which 2 were decimal format styles, 2 were date format styles, and 2 were currency format styles.



FIG. 10G shows an example GUI for creating a custom concept template. Through this GUI, a user can teach the training system a new concept template based on natural language text input by the user. The concept section of the GUI can include a dropdown menu that lists the available concepts for the training system. The user can select which of these concepts is to be used for the custom concept template. The sample text section of the GUI can include a data entry field through which the user types a sentence in a natural language, where this sentence expresses the subject concept in a format that the user wants to add to the system. The anchor word section of the GUI can be a drop down menu that is populated with all of the words of the entered sentence. The user can then select from this word list which of the words is to be used as the anchor word for the subject concept. The anchor word direction section of the GUI allows the user to specify a frame of reference for directionality with respect to the subject anchor word. This can be specified via a user selection of an option of possible directions presented via a drop down menu or the like. Thus, for the change concept anchor word of “hindered”, the user input in the direction section can flag that the word “hindered” corresponds to a downward direction in the data. The opposite anchor word section can include a data entry field through which the user can enter the opposite/antonym of the subject anchor word. This opposite anchor word can also be added as an anchor word for the subject concept (in association with the opposite direction relative to the subject direction entered for the subject anchor word). The training system can then use the subject sentence data entered by the user to extract an appropriate concept expression template that can be presented to the user via the GUI of FIG. 10B.



FIG. 10H shows a sample narrative generated by NLG system 108 that has been adjusted based on the configurations applied by the training system 106. The left side of FIG. 10H shows a marked-up version of the narrative produced by the trained NLG and the right side of FIG. 10H shows a clean version of the narrative produced by the trained NLG. The marked-up version shows specific edits made to the narrative as a result of the training configuration e.g., where “July” and “April” were replaced by the stylistic variants “Jul.” and “Apr.” respectively, where the term “salespeople” was replaced by the stylistic variant “account executive”, etc.).


A parallel specification data structure can be created to capture the user decisions entered via the user interfaces around enabling/disabling the application of various extracted linguistic features from the training data. The parallel data structure which can be a parallel JSON specification can contain lists whose indexes match the original JSON specification's indexes, and each list item can be a JSON object with an “enabled” key. FIG. 11A shows an example JSON specification portion for ontological vocabulary. If the user uses the GUIs to enable the second word (“yield”), but not the first word (“income”), the parallel data structure of FIG. 11B will be produced to reflect these modifications entered via the user interface. The data structure of FIG. 11B can then be sent to an applicator alongside the original JSON specification of FIG. 11A for use programmatically during the configuration manipulation of the NLG system 108.


Also, the system 100 can expose an HTTP API that allows programmatic access to perform corpus creation, JSON specification retrieval, and platform application. This API can be used by the browser application. The endpoints and associated payloads can be described via cURL commands as reflected by FIGS. 12A and 12B. FIG. 12A shows commands for generating a specification from multiple files, where the specification is saved to a JSON file. FIG. 12B shows commands for using a specification in a JSON file to change the configuration for an NLG project.


IV. NLG Configuration/Instrumentation


The final phase of NLG training can employ a platform-specific applicator that takes the specification data structure (plus any user modifications as reflected in a parallel data structure) as an input and then updates the configuration for the NLG system 108 accordingly.


Each applicator can be responsible for defining the necessary business logic to manipulate the platform-specific configuration. It can also be responsible for initializing the necessary database/service/library connections to the platform in order to enact configuration changes. The applicator can then update the styling options for a narrative in the NLG system to reflect the extracted linguistic features for things such as date formats, number formats, etc. With respect to concept expression templates, the applicator can add them to the ontology 410 including as new expressions in the ontology 410 as appropriate (e.g., adding them as expressions to entity types, derived entity types, and/or relationships in the ontology 410 as may be appropriate). In another example embodiment, the concept expression templates can be loaded into or otherwise made available to the NLG AI (e.g., the NLG 530 shown in FIG. 5 of the above-referenced and incorporated Ser. No. 16/183,230 patent application).


An applicator iterates through feature instances for each top-level key in the JSON specification. Before applying changes, it checks the corresponding list in the user settings structure. If the user settings object in the corresponding list index position has an “enabled” key with a false value, the applicator will skip the current feature instance altogether and move on.


In an example, an applicator can process two items of input: (1) the JSON specification, and (2) an identifier for the project to be updated. The applicator then connects to the NLG system's configuration database using a configuration client library provided by the NLG system. This library can use the provided project ID to ensure that the appropriate project-specific configuration subset is accessible.


For each node in the list of vocabulary and concept features in the JSON specification, the applicator can perform the following:

    • 1. Use the node's identifier fields to retrieve the appropriate configuration object.
      • a. For vocabulary, the lookup will use the “object_type” and “object_id” fields.
      • b. For concepts, the lookup will use the “concept” field.
    • 2. Update the “parse_tree” field on configuration object with the contents of the node's “parse_tree” field.
    • 3. Save the updated configuration object back to configuration store.


      Thereafter, the next time a story is produced by the NLG system, it will load the updated configuration and express ontological entities and concepts using the updated expression forms.


While the invention has been described above in relation to its example embodiments, various modifications may be made thereto that still fall within the invention's scope. Such modifications to the invention will be recognizable upon review of the teachings herein.

Claims
  • 1. A natural language processing method comprising: performing natural language processing (NLP) on training data to detect a plurality of linguistic features in the training data, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of words arranged in a natural language, and wherein the detected linguistic features include a date and number textual feature;generating a specification data structure based on the detected linguistic features, the specification data structure arranged for training a natural language generation (NLG) system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data including natural language output that expresses an instance of a date and/or number in a textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature;training the NLG system based on the specification data structure to thereby configure the NLG system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data including natural language output that expresses the instance of the date and/or number in the textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature; andthe trained NLG system processing a data set to generate natural language output, wherein the natural language output includes a date and/or number that is expressed in a textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature;wherein the performing, generating, training, and processing steps are performed by a processor.
  • 2. The method of claim 1 wherein the specification data structure comprises a machine-readable representation of the detected linguistic features.
  • 3. The method of claim 1 wherein the performing step comprises performing pattern matching on the training data to detect the date and number textual feature.
  • 4. The method of claim 3 wherein the pattern matching comprises regular expression pattern matching.
  • 5. The method of claim 1 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a day expressions feature.
  • 6. The method of claim 1 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a month expressions feature.
  • 7. The method of claim 1 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a currency expressions feature.
  • 8. The method of claim 1 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a numeric expressions feature.
  • 9. The method of claim 1 further comprising: modifying the specification data structure to selectively choose in response to user input which of the detected linguistic features are to be used for training the NLG system, wherein the modifying step is performed by the processor.
  • 10. The method of claim 9 further comprising: providing a user interface for presentation to a user, the user interface configured to summarize the detected linguistic features; andreceiving user input through the user interface, wherein the received user input includes commands that identify which of the detected linguistic features are to be used to train the NLG system, wherein the receiving step is performed by the processor.
  • 11. The method of claim 1 further comprising: receiving the training data as text sentence input from a user.
  • 12. The method of claim 1 further comprising: receiving the training data as a pre-existing document.
  • 13. The method of claim 1 further comprising: receiving the training data as speech input from a user.
  • 14. The method of any of claim 1 wherein the training data comprises a corpus of documents.
  • 15. The method of claim 1 wherein the training data comprises a plurality of sentences, the method further comprising performing the NLP on each of a plurality of the sentences to detect a plurality of linguistic features in the sentences.
  • 16. The method of claim 1 wherein the processor comprises a plurality of processors.
  • 17. The method of claim 16 wherein different processors perform the performing and generating steps.
  • 18. The method of claim 16 wherein a first processor performs the performing and generating steps, and wherein a second processor is part of the trained NLG system and performs the processing step.
  • 19. The method of claim 1 wherein the same processor performs the performing and generating steps.
  • 20. An apparatus for natural language processing, the apparatus comprising: a processor configured to (1) perform natural language processing (NLP) on training data to detect a plurality of linguistic features in the training data, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of words arranged in a natural language, and wherein the detected linguistic features include a date and number textual feature, (2) generate a specification data structure based on the detected linguistic features, the specification data structure arranged for training a natural language generation (NLG) system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data including natural language output that expresses an instance of a date and/or number in a textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature, and (3) train the NLG system based on the specification data structure to thereby configure the NLG system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data including natural language output that expresses the instance of the date and/or number in the textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature; andthe trained NLG system, wherein the trained NLG system is configured to process a data set to generate natural language output, wherein the natural language output includes a date and/or number that is expressed in a textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature.
  • 21. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the natural language output expresses an idea derived from the processed data set.
  • 22. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the specification data structure comprises a machine-readable representation of the detected linguistic features.
  • 23. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the processor is further configured to perform pattern matching on the training data to detect the date and number textual feature.
  • 24. The apparatus of claim 23 wherein the pattern matching comprises regular expression pattern matching.
  • 25. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a day expressions feature.
  • 26. The apparatus of claim 25 wherein the processor is further configured to apply a plurality of different day expressions pattern matchers to the training data to detect any of a plurality of different textual forms for expressing days in the training data.
  • 27. The apparatus of claim 26 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) determine a most common textual form for expressing days in the training data based on the different day expressions pattern matchers and (2) generate the specification data structure so that it trains the NLG system to use the most common textual form for expressing days in the produced natural language output.
  • 28. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a month expressions feature.
  • 29. The apparatus of claim 28 wherein the processor is further configured to apply a plurality of different month expressions pattern matchers to the training data to detect any of a plurality of different textual forms for expressing months in the training data.
  • 30. The apparatus of claim 29 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) determine a most common textual form for expressing months in the training data based on the different month expressions pattern matchers and (2) generate the specification data structure so that it trains the NLG system to use the most common textual form for expressing months in the produced natural language output.
  • 31. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a currency expressions feature.
  • 32. The apparatus of claim 31 wherein the processor is further configured to apply a plurality of different currency expressions pattern matchers to the training data to detect any of a plurality of different textual forms for expressing currency values in the training data.
  • 33. The apparatus of claim 32 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) determine a most common textual form for expressing currency values in the training data based on the different currency expressions pattern matchers and (2) generate the specification data structure so that it trains the NLG system to use the most common textual form for expressing currency values in the produced natural language output.
  • 34. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the date and number textual feature comprises a numeric expressions feature.
  • 35. The apparatus of claim 34 wherein the processor is further configured to apply a plurality of different numeric expressions pattern matchers to the training data to detect any of a plurality of different textual forms for expressing integer and decimal values in the training data.
  • 36. The apparatus of claim 35 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) determine a most common textual form for expressing integer and decimal values in the training data based on the different numeric expressions pattern matchers and (2) generate the specification data structure so that it trains the NLG system to use the most common textual form for expressing integer and decimal values in the produced natural language output.
  • 37. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the processor is further configured to further modify the specification data structure to selectively choose in response to user input which of the detected linguistic features are to be used for training the NLG system.
  • 38. The apparatus of claim 37 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) provide a user interface for presentation to a user, the user interface configured to summarize the detected linguistic features, and (2) receive user input through the user interface, wherein the received user input includes commands that identify which of the detected linguistic features are to be used to train the NLG system.
  • 39. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the processor is further configured to receive the training data as text sentence input from a user.
  • 40. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the processor is further configured to receive the training data as a pre-existing document.
  • 41. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the processor is further configured to receive the training data as speech input from a user.
  • 42. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the training data comprises a corpus of documents.
  • 43. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the training data comprises a plurality of sentences, and wherein the processor is further configured to perform the NLP on each of a plurality of the sentences to detect a plurality of linguistic features in the sentences.
  • 44. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the processor comprises a plurality of processors.
  • 45. The apparatus of claim 20 wherein the processor is part of an NLP system, and wherein the NLG system includes a different processor.
  • 46. A computer program product for natural language processing, the computer program product comprising: a plurality of processor-executable instructions that are resident on a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, wherein the instructions are configured, upon execution by a processor, to cause the processor to (1) perform natural language processing (NLP) on training data to detect a plurality of linguistic features in the training data, wherein the training data comprises a plurality of words arranged in a natural language, and wherein the detected linguistic features include a date and number textual feature, (2) generate a specification data structure based on the detected linguistic features, the specification data structure arranged for training a natural language generation (NLG) system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data including natural language output that expresses an instance of a date and/or number in a textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature, and (3) train the NLG system based on the specification data structure to thereby configure the NLG system to produce natural language output that stylistically resembles the training data including natural language output that expresses the instance of the date and/or number in the textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature, wherein the trained NLG system is configured to process a data set to generate natural language output, wherein the natural language output includes a date and/or number that is expressed in a textual form in accordance with the detected date and number textual feature.
CROSS-REFERENCE AND PRIORITY CLAIM TO RELATED PATENT APPLICATIONS

This patent application claims priority to U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 62/691,197, filed Jun. 28, 2018, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Using Natural Language Processing to Train a Natural Language Generation System”, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. This patent application is related to (1) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/444,649, filed this same day, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Using Natural Language Processing and Concept Expression Templates to Train a Natural Language Generation System”, (2) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/444,689, filed this same day, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Using Natural Language Processing to Train a Natural Language Generation System With Respect to Numeric Style Features”, and (3) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/444,748, filed this same day, and entitled “Applied Artificial Intelligence Technology for Using Natural Language Processing to Train a Natural Language Generation System”, the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.

US Referenced Citations (378)
Number Name Date Kind
4992939 Tyler Feb 1991 A
5619631 Schott Apr 1997 A
5734916 Greenfield et al. Mar 1998 A
5794050 Dahlgren et al. Aug 1998 A
5802495 Goltra Sep 1998 A
5999664 Mahoney et al. Dec 1999 A
6006175 Holzrichter Dec 1999 A
6144938 Surace et al. Nov 2000 A
6278967 Akers et al. Aug 2001 B1
6289363 Consolatti et al. Sep 2001 B1
6651218 Adler et al. Nov 2003 B1
6665666 Brown et al. Dec 2003 B1
6757362 Cooper et al. Jun 2004 B1
6771290 Hoyle Aug 2004 B1
6917936 Cancedda Jul 2005 B2
6968316 Hamilton Nov 2005 B1
6976031 Toupal et al. Dec 2005 B1
6976207 Rujan et al. Dec 2005 B1
7027974 Busch et al. Apr 2006 B1
7246315 Andrieu et al. Jul 2007 B1
7324936 Saldanha et al. Jan 2008 B2
7333967 Bringsjord et al. Feb 2008 B1
7496621 Pan et al. Feb 2009 B2
7577634 Ryan et al. Aug 2009 B2
7610279 Budzik et al. Oct 2009 B2
7617199 Budzik et al. Nov 2009 B2
7617200 Budzik et al. Nov 2009 B2
7627565 Budzik et al. Dec 2009 B2
7644072 Budzik et al. Jan 2010 B2
7657518 Budzik et al. Feb 2010 B2
7716116 Schiller May 2010 B2
7778895 Baxter et al. Aug 2010 B1
7825929 Kincaid Nov 2010 B2
7836010 Hammond et al. Nov 2010 B2
7840448 Musgrove et al. Nov 2010 B2
7856390 Schiller Dec 2010 B2
7865496 Schiller Jan 2011 B1
7930169 Billerey-Mosier Apr 2011 B2
8046226 Soble et al. Oct 2011 B2
8311863 Kemp Nov 2012 B1
8355903 Birnbaum et al. Jan 2013 B1
8374848 Birnbaum et al. Feb 2013 B1
8442940 Faletti et al. May 2013 B1
8447604 Chang May 2013 B1
8463695 Schiller Jun 2013 B2
8468244 Redlich et al. Jun 2013 B2
8494944 Schiller Jul 2013 B2
8515737 Allen Aug 2013 B2
8612208 Cooper et al. Dec 2013 B2
8630844 Nichols et al. Jan 2014 B1
8630912 Seki et al. Jan 2014 B2
8630919 Baran et al. Jan 2014 B2
8676691 Schiller Mar 2014 B2
8688434 Birnbaum et al. Apr 2014 B1
8762133 Reiter Jun 2014 B2
8762134 Reiter Jun 2014 B2
8762285 Davis et al. Jun 2014 B2
8775161 Nichols et al. Jul 2014 B1
8812311 Weber Aug 2014 B2
8843363 Birnbaum et al. Sep 2014 B2
8886520 Nichols et al. Nov 2014 B1
8892417 Nichols et al. Nov 2014 B1
8892419 Lundberg et al. Nov 2014 B2
8903711 Lundberg et al. Dec 2014 B2
8977953 Pierre et al. Mar 2015 B1
9135244 Reiter Sep 2015 B2
9164982 Kaeser Oct 2015 B1
9208147 Nichols et al. Dec 2015 B1
9244894 Dale et al. Jan 2016 B1
9251134 Birnbaum et al. Feb 2016 B2
9323743 Reiter Apr 2016 B2
9336193 Logan et al. May 2016 B2
9348815 Estes et al. May 2016 B1
9355093 Reiter May 2016 B2
9396168 Birnbaum et al. Jul 2016 B2
9396181 Sripada et al. Jul 2016 B1
9396758 Oz et al. Jul 2016 B2
9405448 Reiter Aug 2016 B2
9424254 Howald et al. Aug 2016 B2
9430557 Bhat et al. Aug 2016 B2
9460075 Mungi et al. Oct 2016 B2
9529795 Kondadadi et al. Dec 2016 B2
9535902 Michalak et al. Jan 2017 B1
9576009 Hammond et al. Feb 2017 B1
9665259 Lee et al. May 2017 B2
9697178 Nichols et al. Jul 2017 B1
9697192 Estes et al. Jul 2017 B1
9697197 Birnbaum et al. Jul 2017 B1
9697492 Birnbaum et al. Jul 2017 B1
9720884 Birnbaum et al. Aug 2017 B2
9720899 Birnbaum et al. Aug 2017 B1
9741151 Breedvelt-Schouten et al. Aug 2017 B2
9767145 Prophete et al. Sep 2017 B2
9773166 Connor et al. Sep 2017 B1
9792277 Srinivasan Oct 2017 B2
9870362 Lee et al. Jan 2018 B2
9870629 Cardno et al. Jan 2018 B2
9946711 Reiter et al. Apr 2018 B2
9971967 Bufe, III et al. May 2018 B2
9977773 Birnbaum et al. May 2018 B1
9990337 Birnbaum et al. Jun 2018 B2
10019512 Boyle et al. Jul 2018 B2
10037377 Boyle et al. Jul 2018 B2
10049152 Ajmera et al. Aug 2018 B2
10068185 Amershi et al. Sep 2018 B2
10073861 Shamir et al. Sep 2018 B2
10095692 Song et al. Oct 2018 B2
10101889 Prophete et al. Oct 2018 B2
10115108 Gendelev et al. Oct 2018 B1
10162900 Chatterjee et al. Dec 2018 B1
10185477 Paley et al. Jan 2019 B1
10268678 Qiu et al. Apr 2019 B2
10332297 Vadodaria Jun 2019 B1
10339423 Dinerstein et al. Jul 2019 B1
10387970 Wang et al. Aug 2019 B1
10416841 Riche et al. Sep 2019 B2
10489488 Birnbaum et al. Nov 2019 B2
10565308 Reiter Feb 2020 B2
10621183 Chatterjee et al. Apr 2020 B1
10657201 Nichols et al. May 2020 B1
10679011 Galitsky Jun 2020 B2
10699079 Paley et al. Jun 2020 B1
10706236 Platt et al. Jul 2020 B1
10726061 Chu et al. Jul 2020 B2
10747823 Birnbaum et al. Aug 2020 B1
10755046 Lewis Meza et al. Aug 2020 B1
10810260 Chen et al. Oct 2020 B2
10853583 Platt et al. Dec 2020 B1
11030697 Erard et al. Jun 2021 B2
11055497 Noh et al. Jul 2021 B2
20020046018 Marcu et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020083025 Robarts et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020107721 Darwent et al. Aug 2002 A1
20030004706 Yale et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030061029 Shaket Mar 2003 A1
20030182102 Corston-Oliver et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030216905 Chelba et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040015342 Garst Jan 2004 A1
20040034520 Langkilde-Geary et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040068691 Asbury Apr 2004 A1
20040138899 Birnbaum et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040174397 Cereghini et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040225651 Musgrove et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040230989 Macey et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040255232 Hammond et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050027704 Hammond et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050028156 Hammond et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050033582 Gadd et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050049852 Chao Mar 2005 A1
20050125213 Chen et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050137854 Cancedda et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050273362 Harris et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060031182 Ryan et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060074634 Gao et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060100852 Gamon May 2006 A1
20060101335 Pisciottano May 2006 A1
20060181531 Goldschmidt Aug 2006 A1
20060212446 Hammond et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060218485 Blumenthal Sep 2006 A1
20060224570 Quiroga et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060241936 Katae Oct 2006 A1
20060271535 Hammond et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060277168 Hammond et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070132767 Wright et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070136657 Blumenthal et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070185846 Budzik et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070185847 Budzik et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070185861 Budzik et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070185862 Budzik et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070185863 Budzik et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070185864 Budzik et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070185865 Budzik et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070250479 Lunt et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070250826 O'Brien Oct 2007 A1
20070294201 Nelken et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080005677 Thompson Jan 2008 A1
20080140696 Mathuria Jun 2008 A1
20080198156 Jou et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080250070 Abdulla et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080256066 Zuckerman et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080304808 Newell et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080306882 Schiller Dec 2008 A1
20080313130 Hammond et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090019013 Tareen et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090030899 Tareen et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090049041 Tareen et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090083288 LeDain et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090119584 Herbst May 2009 A1
20090144608 Oisel et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090144609 Liang et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090157664 Wen Jun 2009 A1
20090175545 Cancedda et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090248399 Au Oct 2009 A1
20100146393 Land et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100161541 Covannon et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100185984 Wright et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100241620 Manister et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100325107 Kenton et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110022941 Osborne et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110040837 Eden et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110044447 Morris et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110077958 Breitenstein et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110078105 Wallace Mar 2011 A1
20110087486 Schiller Apr 2011 A1
20110099184 Symington Apr 2011 A1
20110113315 Datha et al. May 2011 A1
20110113334 Joy et al. May 2011 A1
20110213642 Makar et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110246182 Allen Oct 2011 A1
20110249953 Suri et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110261049 Cardno et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110288852 Dymetman et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110295595 Cao Dec 2011 A1
20110295903 Chen Dec 2011 A1
20110307435 Overell et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110311144 Tardif Dec 2011 A1
20110314381 Fuller et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120011428 Chisholm Jan 2012 A1
20120041903 Beilby et al. Feb 2012 A1
20120069131 Abelow Mar 2012 A1
20120109637 Merugu et al. May 2012 A1
20120143849 Wong et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120158850 Harrison et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120166180 Au Jun 2012 A1
20120265531 Bennett Oct 2012 A1
20120291007 Bagheri Nov 2012 A1
20120310699 McKenna et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130041677 Nusimow et al. Feb 2013 A1
20130091031 Baran et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130096947 Shah et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130138430 Eden et al. May 2013 A1
20130144605 Brager et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130145242 Birnbaum et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130173285 Hyde et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130174026 Locke Jul 2013 A1
20130185049 Zhao et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130185051 Buryak Jul 2013 A1
20130187926 Silverstein et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130211855 Eberle et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130238316 Shastri Sep 2013 A1
20130238330 Casella dos Santos Sep 2013 A1
20130246934 Wade et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130253910 Turner et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130262092 Wasick Oct 2013 A1
20130275121 Tunstall-Pedoe Oct 2013 A1
20130304507 Dail et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130316834 Vogel et al. Nov 2013 A1
20140006012 Zhou et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140040312 Gorman et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140062712 Reiter Mar 2014 A1
20140075004 Van Dusen et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140129942 Rathod May 2014 A1
20140134590 Hiscock, Jr. May 2014 A1
20140163962 Castelli et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140200878 Mylonakis et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140201202 Jones et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140208215 Deshpande Jul 2014 A1
20140314225 Riahi et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140351281 Tunstall-Pedoe Nov 2014 A1
20140356833 Sabczynski et al. Dec 2014 A1
20140372850 Campbell et al. Dec 2014 A1
20140375466 Reiter Dec 2014 A1
20150032730 Cialdea, Jr. et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150049951 Chaturvedi et al. Feb 2015 A1
20150078232 Djinki et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150134694 Burke et al. May 2015 A1
20150142704 London May 2015 A1
20150161997 Wetsel et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150169548 Reiter Jun 2015 A1
20150178386 Oberkampf et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150186504 Gorman et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150199339 Mirkin et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150227508 Howald et al. Aug 2015 A1
20150227588 Shapira et al. Aug 2015 A1
20150242384 Reiter Aug 2015 A1
20150261745 Song Sep 2015 A1
20150268930 Lee et al. Sep 2015 A1
20150286630 Bateman Oct 2015 A1
20150324347 Bradshaw et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150324351 Sripada et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150324374 Sripada et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150325000 Sripada Nov 2015 A1
20150331846 Guggilla et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150331850 Ramish Nov 2015 A1
20150332665 Mishra et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150339284 Ban Nov 2015 A1
20150347391 Chen Dec 2015 A1
20150347400 Sripada Dec 2015 A1
20150347901 Cama et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150356967 Byron et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150363364 Sripada Dec 2015 A1
20150370778 Tremblay et al. Dec 2015 A1
20160019200 Allen Jan 2016 A1
20160026253 Bradski et al. Jan 2016 A1
20160027125 Bryce Jan 2016 A1
20160054889 Hadley et al. Feb 2016 A1
20160062954 Ruff et al. Mar 2016 A1
20160103559 Maheshwari et al. Apr 2016 A1
20160132489 Reiter May 2016 A1
20160140090 Dale et al. May 2016 A1
20160162582 Chatterjee et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160196491 Chandrasekaran et al. Jul 2016 A1
20160217133 Reiter et al. Jul 2016 A1
20160232152 Mahamood Aug 2016 A1
20160232221 McCloskey et al. Aug 2016 A1
20160314121 Arroyo et al. Oct 2016 A1
20160314123 Ramachandran et al. Oct 2016 A1
20160379132 Jin Dec 2016 A1
20170004415 Moretti et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170006135 Siebel et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170017897 Bugay et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170024465 Yeh et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170026705 Yeh et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170046016 Riche et al. Feb 2017 A1
20170060857 Imbruce et al. Mar 2017 A1
20170061093 Amarasingham et al. Mar 2017 A1
20170068551 Vadodaria Mar 2017 A1
20170091291 Bostick et al. Mar 2017 A1
20170104785 Stolfo Apr 2017 A1
20170116327 Gorelick et al. Apr 2017 A1
20170124062 Bhaowal et al. May 2017 A1
20170125015 Dielmann May 2017 A1
20170131975 Balasubramanian May 2017 A1
20170140405 Gottemukkala et al. May 2017 A1
20170185674 Tonkin et al. Jun 2017 A1
20170199928 Zhao et al. Jul 2017 A1
20170206890 Tapuhi et al. Jul 2017 A1
20170212671 Sathish et al. Jul 2017 A1
20170213157 Bugay et al. Jul 2017 A1
20170228372 Moreno et al. Aug 2017 A1
20170228659 Lin Aug 2017 A1
20170242886 Jolley et al. Aug 2017 A1
20170270105 Ninan et al. Sep 2017 A1
20170293864 Oh et al. Oct 2017 A1
20170358295 Roux et al. Dec 2017 A1
20170371856 Can et al. Dec 2017 A1
20180025726 Gatti de Bayser et al. Jan 2018 A1
20180060759 Chu Mar 2018 A1
20180075368 Brennan et al. Mar 2018 A1
20180081869 Hager Mar 2018 A1
20180082184 Guo et al. Mar 2018 A1
20180089177 Cho Mar 2018 A1
20180114158 Foubert et al. Apr 2018 A1
20180129721 Apple May 2018 A1
20180189284 Hosabettu Jul 2018 A1
20180232443 Delgo et al. Aug 2018 A1
20180232487 Erard et al. Aug 2018 A1
20180232493 Erard et al. Aug 2018 A1
20180232812 Erard et al. Aug 2018 A1
20180234442 Luo Aug 2018 A1
20180260380 Birnbaum et al. Sep 2018 A1
20180261203 Zoller et al. Sep 2018 A1
20180285324 Birnbaum et al. Oct 2018 A1
20180314689 Wang et al. Nov 2018 A1
20180373999 Xu Dec 2018 A1
20190042559 Allen et al. Feb 2019 A1
20190102614 Winder Apr 2019 A1
20190121918 Fort Apr 2019 A1
20190138615 Huh et al. May 2019 A1
20190147849 Talwar May 2019 A1
20190197097 Nagarajan et al. Jun 2019 A1
20190236140 Canim et al. Aug 2019 A1
20190272827 Vozila Sep 2019 A1
20190312968 Moon Oct 2019 A1
20190332666 Dadachev et al. Oct 2019 A1
20190347553 Lo Nov 2019 A1
20190370696 Ezen Can et al. Dec 2019 A1
20200074013 Chen et al. Mar 2020 A1
20200074310 Li et al. Mar 2020 A1
20200074401 Oliveira Almeida Mar 2020 A1
20200089735 Birnbaum et al. Mar 2020 A1
20200110902 Zakour Apr 2020 A1
20200134032 Lin et al. Apr 2020 A1
20200143468 Riley May 2020 A1
20200151443 Florencio May 2020 A1
20200202846 Bapna Jun 2020 A1
20200302393 Gupta Sep 2020 A1
20200379780 Sutton Dec 2020 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (16)
Number Date Country
9630844 Oct 1996 WO
2006122329 Nov 2006 WO
2014035400 Mar 2014 WO
2014035402 Mar 2014 WO
2014035403 Mar 2014 WO
2014035406 Mar 2014 WO
2014035407 Mar 2014 WO
2014035447 Mar 2014 WO
2014070197 May 2014 WO
2014076524 May 2014 WO
2014076525 May 2014 WO
2014102568 Jul 2014 WO
2014102569 Jul 2014 WO
2014111753 Jul 2014 WO
2015028844 Mar 2015 WO
2015159133 Oct 2015 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (75)
Entry
Allen et al., “StatsMonkey: A Data-Driven Sports Narrative Writer”, Computational Models of Narrative: Papers from the AAAI Fall Symposium, Nov. 2010, 2 pages.
Andersen, P., Hayes, P., Huettner, A., Schmandt, L., Nirenburg, I., and Weinstein, S. (1992). Automatic extraction of facts from press releases to generate news stories. In Proceedings of the third conference on Applied natural language processing. (Trento, Italy). ACM Press, New York, NY, 170-177.
Andre, E., Herzog, G., & Rist, T. (1988). On the simultaneous interpretation of real world image sequences and their natural language description: the system SOCCER. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 8th. European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), Munich.
Asset Economics, Inc. (Feb. 11, 2011).
Bailey, P. (1999). Searching for Storiness: Story-Generation from a Reader's Perspective. AAAI Technical Report FS-99-01.
Bethem, T., Burton, J., Caldwell, T., Evans, M., Kittredge, R., Lavoie, B., and Werner, J. (2005). Generation of Real-time Narrative Summaries for Real-time Water Levels and Meteorological Observations in PORTS®. In Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applications to Environmental Sciences (AMS-2005), San Diego, California.
Bourbeau, L., Carcagno, D., Goldberg, E., Kittredge, R., & Polguere, A. (1990). Bilingual generation of weather forecasts in an operations environment. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), Helsinki, Finland, pp. 318-320.
Boyd, S. (1998). TREND: a system for generating intelligent descriptions of time series data. Paper presented at Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on intelligent processing systems (ICIPS-1998).
Character Writer Version 3.1, Typing Chimp Software LLC, 2012, screenshots from working program, pp. 1-19.
Dehn, N. (1981). Story generation after TALE-SPIN. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. (Vancouver, Canada).
Dramatica Pro version 4, Write Brothers, 1993-2006, user manual.
Gatt, A., and Portet, F. (2009). Text content and task performance in the evaluation of a Natural Language Generation System. Proceedings of the Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP-09).
Gatt, A., Portet, F., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., Mahamood, S., Moncur, W., and Sripada, S. (2009). From data to text in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Using NLG technology for decision support and information management. AI Communications 22, pp. 153-186.
Glahn, H. (1970). Computer-produced worded forecasts. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 51(12), 1126-1131.
Goldberg, E., Driedger, N., & Kittredge, R. (1994). Using Natural-Language Processing to Produce Weather Forecasts. IEEE Expert, 9 (2), 45.
Hargood, C., Millard, D. and Weal, M. (2009) Exploring the Importance of Themes in Narrative Systems.
Hargood, C., Millard, D. and Weal, M. (2009). Investigating a Thematic Approach to Narrative Generation, 2009.
Hunter, J., Freer, Y., Gatt, A., Logie, R., McIntosh, N., van der Meulen, M., Portet, F., Reiter, E., Sripada, S., and Sykes, C. (2008). Summarising Complex ICU Data in Natural Language. AMIA 2008 Annual Symposium Proceedings, pp. 323-327.
Hunter, J., Gatt, A., Portet, F., Reiter, E., and Sripada, S. (2008). Using natural language generation technology to improve information flows in intensive care units. Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems, PAIS-08.
Kittredge, R., and Lavoie, B. (1998). MeteoCogent: A Knowledge-Based Tool for Generating Weather Forecast Texts. In Proceedings of the American Meteorological Society AI Conference (AMS-98), Phoenix, Arizona.
Kittredge, R., Polguere, A., & Goldberg, E. (1986). Synthesizing weather reports from formatted data. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Bonn, Germany, pp. 563-565.
Kukich, K. (1983). Design of a Knowledge-Based Report Generator. Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA, pp. 145-150.
Kukich, K. (1983). Knowledge-Based Report Generation: A Technique for Automatically Generating Natural Language Reports from Databases. Paper presented at Proceedings of the Sixth International ACM SIGIR Conference, Washington, DC.
McKeown, K., Kukich, K., & Shaw, J. (1994). Practical issues in automatic documentation generation. 4th Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Stuttgart, Germany, pp. 7-14.
Meehan, James R., TALE-SPIN. (1977). An Interactive Program that Writes Stories. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
Memorandum Opinion and Order for O2 Media, LLC v. Narrative Science Inc., Case 1:15-cv-05129 (N.D. IL), Feb. 25, 2016, 25 pages (invalidating claims of U.S. Pat. No. 7,856,390, U.S. Pat. No. 8,494,944, and U.S. Pat. No. 8,676,691 owned by O2 Media, LLC.
Moncur, W., and Reiter, E. (2007). How Much to Tell? Disseminating Affective Information across a Social Network. Proceedings of Second International Workshop on Personalisation for e-Health.
Moncur, W., Masthoff, J., Reiter, E. (2008) What Do You Want to Know? Investigating the Information Requirements of Patient Supporters. 21st IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS 2008), pp. 443-448.
Movie Magic Screenwriter, Write Brothers, 2009, user manual.
Portet, F., Reiter, E., Gatt, A., Hunter, J., Sripada, S., Freer, Y., and Sykes, C. (2009). Automatic Generation of Textual Summaries from Neonatal Intensive Care Data. Artificial Intelligence.
Portet, F., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., and Sripada, S. (2007). Automatic Generation of Textual Summaries from Neonatal Intensive Care Data. In: Bellazzi, Riccardo, Ameen Abu-Hanna and Jim Hunter (Ed.), 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (AIME 07), pp. 227-236.
Reiter et al., “Building Applied Natural Generation Systems”, Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 1-32.
Reiter, E. (2007). An architecture for Data-To-Text systems. In: Busemann, Stephan (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, pp. 97-104.
Reiter, E., Gatt, A., Portet, F., and van der Meulen, M. (2008). The importance of narrative and other lessons from an evaluation of an NLG system that summarises clinical data. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Natural Language Generation.
Reiter, E., Sripada, S., Hunter, J., Yu, J., and Davy, I. (2005). Choosing words in computer-generated weather forecasts. Artificial Intelligence, 167:137-169.
Riedl et al., “Narrative Planning: Balancing Plot and Character”, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2010, pp. 217-268, vol. 39.
Robin, J. (1996). Evaluating the portability of revision rules for incremental summary generation. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 34th. Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL'96), Santa Cruz, CA.
Rui, Y., Gupta, A., and Acero, A. 2000. Automatically extracting highlights for TV Baseball programs. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM international conference on Multimedia. (Marina del Rey, California, United States). ACM Press, New York, NY 105-115.
Sripada, S., Reiter, E., and Davy, I. (2003). SumTime-Mousam: Configurable Marine Weather Forecast Generator. Expert Update 6(3):4-10.
Storyview, Screenplay Systems, 2000, user manual.
Theune, M., Klabbers, E., Odijk, J., dePijper, J., and Krahmer, E. (2001) “From Data to Speech: A General Approach”, Natural Language Engineering 7(1): 47-86.
Thomas, K., and Sripada, S. (2007). Atlas.txt: Linking Geo-referenced Data to Text for NLG. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 2007 European Natural Language Generation Workshop (ENLGO7).
Thomas, K., and Sripada, S. (2008). What's in a message? Interpreting Geo-referenced Data for the Visually-impaired. Proceedings of the Int. conference on NLG.
Thomas, K., Sumegi, L., Ferres, L., and Sripada, S. (2008). Enabling Access to Geo-referenced Information: Atlas.txt. Proceedings of the Cross-disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility.
Van der Meulen, M., Logie, R., Freer, Y., Sykes, C., McIntosh, N., and Hunter, J. (2008). When a Graph is Poorer than 100 Words: A Comparison of Computerised Natural Language Generation, Human Generated Descriptions and Graphical Displays in Neonatal Intensive Care. Applied Cognitive Psychology.
Yu, J., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., and Mellish, C. (2007). Choosing the content of textual summaries of large time-series data sets. Natural Language Engineering, 13:25-49.
Yu, J., Reiter, E., Hunter, J., and Sripada, S. (2003). SUMTIME-TURBINE: A Knowledge-Based System to Communicate Time Series Data in the Gas Turbine Domain. In P Chung et al. (Eds) Developments in Applied Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of IEA/AIE-2003, pp. 379-384. Springer (LNAI 2718).
Riedl et al., “From Linear Story Generation to Branching Story Graphs”, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 2006, pp. 23-31.
EnglisheForums, “Direct Objects, Indirect Objects, Obliques, Dative Movement?”, [online] https://www.englishforums.com, published 2007. (Year: 2007).
Mack et al., “A Framework for Metrics in Large Complex Systems”, IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings, 2004, pp. 3217-3228, vol. 5, doi: 10.1109/AERO .2004.1368127.
Mahamood et al., “Generating Annotated Graphs Using the NLG Pipeline Architecture”, Proceedings of the 8th International Natural Language Generation Conference (INLG), 2014.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/444,689 dated Feb. 5, 2021.
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/444,649, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,706,236, filed Jun. 18, 2019.
Roberts et al., “Lessons on Using Computationally Generated Influence for Shaping Narrative Experiences”, IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games, Jun. 2014, pp. 188-202, vol. 6, No. 2, doi: 10.1109/TCIAIG .2013.2287154.
Segel et al., “Narrative Visualization: Telling Stories with Data”, Stanford University, Oct. 2010, 10 pgs.
Cyganiak et al., “RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax”, W3C Recommendation, 2014, vol. 25, No. 2.
Smith, “The Multivariable Method in Singular Perturbation Analysis”, SIAM Review, 1975, pp. 221-273, vol. 17, No. 2.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/666,168 dated Jun. 14, 2021.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,649 dated Jun. 25, 2021.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,696 dated Jul. 21, 2021.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/235,636 dated Apr. 30, 2021.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/277,006 dated Feb. 18, 2021.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/414,027 dated Jan. 21, 2021.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/414,089 dated Jan. 21, 2021.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/666,168 dated Nov. 13, 2020.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/666,151 dated Jun. 10, 2021.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/183,270 dated Apr. 13, 2021.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/253,556 dated Jun. 14, 2021.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/277,004 dated Jun. 24, 2021.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/744,537 dated Aug. 3, 2021.
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,331, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,762,304, filed Feb. 15, 2018.
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/444,748, now U.S. Pat. No. 11,042,713, filed Jun. 18, 2019.
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/689,699, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,956,656, filed Nov. 20, 2019.
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/277,003, filed Mar. 15, 2021.
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/277,004 dated Sep. 2, 2020.
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
62691197 Jun 2018 US