Method and apparatus for configurable microplanning

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10565308
  • Patent Number
    10,565,308
  • Date Filed
    Monday, August 10, 2015
    8 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 18, 2020
    4 years ago
Abstract
Methods, apparatuses, and computer program products are described herein that are configured to be embodied as a configurable microplanner. In some example embodiments, a method is provided that comprises accessing a document plan containing one or more messages. The method of this embodiment may also include generating a text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the one or more messages in the document plan. The method of this embodiment may also include applying a set of lexicalization rules to each of the one or more messages to populate the one or more phrase specifications. In some example embodiments, the set of lexicalization rules are specified using a microplanning rule specification language that is configured to hide linguistic complexities from a user. In some example embodiments, genre parameters may also be used to specify constraints that provide default behaviors for the realization process.
Description
TECHNOLOGICAL FIELD

Embodiments of the present invention relate generally to natural language generation technologies and, more particularly, relate to a method, apparatus, and computer program product for configurable microplanning.


BACKGROUND

In some examples, a natural language generation (NLG) system is configured to transform raw input data that is expressed in a non-linguistic format into a format that can be expressed linguistically, such as through the use of natural language. For example, raw input data may take the form of a value of a stock market index over time and, as such, the raw input data may include data that is suggestive of a time, a duration, a value and/or the like. Therefore, an NLG system may be configured to input the raw input data and output text that linguistically describes the value of the stock market index; for example, “Securities markets rose steadily through most of the morning, before sliding downhill late in the day.”


Data that is input into a NLG system may be provided in, for example, a recurrent formal structure. The recurrent formal structure may comprise a plurality of individual fields and defined relationships between the plurality of individual fields. For example, the input data may be contained in a spreadsheet or database, presented in a tabulated log message or other defined structure, encoded in a ‘knowledge representation’ such as the resource description framework (RDF) triples that make up the Semantic Web and/or the like. In some examples, the data may include numerical content, symbolic content or the like. Symbolic content may include, but is not limited to, alphanumeric and other non-numeric character sequences in any character encoding, used to represent arbitrary elements of information. In some examples, the output of the NLG system is text in a natural language (e.g. English, Japanese or Swahili), but may also be in the form of synthesized speech.


BRIEF SUMMARY

Methods, apparatuses, and computer program products are described herein that are configured to be embodied as and/or performed by a configurable microplanner. In some example embodiments, a method is provided that comprises accessing a document plan containing one or more messages. The method of this embodiment may also include generating a text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the one or more messages in the document plan. The method of this embodiment may also include applying a set of lexicalization rules to each of the one or more messages to populate the one or more phrase specifications. In some example embodiments, the set of lexicalization rules are specified using a microplanning rule specification language that is configured to hide linguistic complexities from a user. In some example embodiments, genre parameters may also be used to specify constraints that provide default behaviors for the realization process.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Having thus described embodiments of the invention in general terms, reference will now be made to the accompanying drawings, which are not necessarily drawn to scale, and wherein:



FIG. 1 is a schematic representation of natural language generation environment that may benefit from some example embodiments of the present invention;



FIG. 2 illustrates an example configurable microplanner according to some example embodiments described herein;



FIG. 3 illustrates an example document plan tree and a text specification in accordance with some example embodiments of the present invention;



FIG. 4 illustrates a block diagram of an apparatus that embodies a configurable microplanner system in accordance with some example embodiments of the present invention; and



FIGS. 5 through 8 illustrate flowcharts that may be performed by a configurable microplanner in accordance with some example embodiments of the present invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Example embodiments will now be described more fully hereinafter with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which some, but not all embodiments are shown. Indeed, the embodiments may take many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will satisfy applicable legal requirements. Like reference numerals refer to like elements throughout. The terms “data,” “content,” “information,” and similar terms may be used interchangeably, according to some example embodiments, to refer to data capable of being transmitted, received, operated on, and/or stored. Moreover, the term “exemplary”, as may be used herein, is not provided to convey any qualitative assessment, but instead merely to convey an illustration of an example. Thus, use of any such terms should not be taken to limit the spirit and scope of embodiments of the present invention.


In some examples, the stage of natural language generation known as sentence planning and/or microplanning includes the process of transforming, mapping or otherwise converting fragments of data, information or the like (e.g. messages) into specifications (e.g. phrase specifications, sentence plans or the like), such that the specifications can be further processed by a realizer (e.g. a linguistic realization component). In some examples, the realizer may be configured to apply the mechanical aspects of language, by applying the rules of syntax, punctuation and orthography to the contents of a phrase specification in order to produce a fragment of natural language text. However, in some examples, a user of a microplanner generally needs to possess a sophisticated knowledge of linguistics in order to be able to write and/or otherwise apply rules that map or otherwise convert fragments into specifications.


Methods, apparatuses, and computer program products are described herein that are configured to enable an individual with limited knowledge of linguistics to control the behavior and output of a natural language generation system by specifying rules and constraints that define characteristics of the text to be generated. In some example embodiments, the rules may identify correspondences between input message structures and particular words and phrases that are used to express those messages such that a phrase specification may be produced that contains those words and phrases. In further examples, the rules may identify correspondences between input message structures and natural language syntactic constituents that are used to express those messages such that the content of message elements are mapped to parts of the phrase specification. In further examples, the rules may specify particular strategies that may be performed in order to carry out subtasks of the overall natural language generation task. In further examples, the subtasks may allow external processes to be responsible for completing parts of a phrase specification or text specification. In additional examples, a user, a domain model, genre parameters or the like may specify constraints that serve to provide default behaviors for the realization process, which, in some examples, may be overwritten by the identified rules. Alternatively or additionally, an optimization process may take a number of phrase specifications and combine and/or modify their contents to produce an alternative phrase specification.



FIG. 1 is an example block diagram of example components of an example natural language generation environment 100. In some example embodiments, the natural language generation environment 100 comprises a natural language generation system, a message store 110, a domain model 112 and/or linguistic resources 114. The natural language generation system 104 may take the form of, for example, a code module, a component, circuitry and/or the like. The components of the natural language generation environment 100 are configured to provide various logic (e.g. code, instructions, functions, routines and/or the like) and/or services related to the configurable microplanner.


A message store 110 is configured to store one or more messages that are accessible by the natural language generation system 104. Messages are language independent data structures that correspond to informational elements in a text and/or collect together underlying data, referred to as slots, arguments or features, which can be presented within a fragment of natural language such as a phrase or sentence. Messages may be represented in various ways; for example, each slot may consist of a named attribute and its corresponding value; these values may recursively consist of sets of named attributes and their values, and each message may belong to one of a set of predefined types. The concepts and relationships that make up messages may be drawn from an ontology (e.g. a domain model 112) that formally represents knowledge about the application scenario.


In some examples, the domain model 112 is a representation of information about a particular domain. For example, a domain model may contain an ontology that specifies the kinds of objects, concepts and/or the like that may exist in the domain in concrete or abstract form, properties that may be predicated of the objects, concepts and the like, relationships that may hold between the objects, concepts and the like, and representations of any specific knowledge that is required to function in the particular domain.


In some examples, messages are created based on a requirements analysis as to what is to be communicated for a particular scenario (e.g. for a particular domain or genre). A message typically corresponds to a fact about the underlying data (for example, the existence of some observed event) that could be expressed via a simple sentence (although it may ultimately be realized by some other linguistic means). For example, to linguistically describe wind, a user may want to know a speed, a direction, a time period or the like, but the user may also want to know changes in speed over time, warm or cold fronts, geographic areas and or the like. In some cases, users do not even want to know wind speed values, but instead want an indication that describes the presence of a dangerous wind condition. Thus, a message related to wind speed may include fields to be populated by data related to the speed, direction, time period or the like, and may have other fields related to different time points, front information or the like. The mere fact that wind exists may be found in the data, but to linguistically describe “light wind” or “gusts” different data interpretation must be undertaken as is described herein.


In some examples, a message is created in an instance in which the raw input data warrants the construction of such a message. For example, a wind message would only be constructed in an instance in which wind data was present in the raw input data. Alternatively or additionally, while messages may correspond directly to observations taken from a raw data input, others may be derived from the observations by means of a process of inference or based on one or more detected events. For example, the presence of rain may be indicative of other conditions, such as the potential for snow at some temperatures.


Messages may be instantiated based on many variations of source data, such as but not limited to time series data, time and space data, data from multiple data channels, an ontology, sentence or phrase extraction from one or more texts, a text, survey responses, structured data, unstructured data and/or the like. For example, in some cases, messages may be generated based on text related to multiple new articles focused on the same or similar news stories in order to generate a news story; whereas in other examples, messages may be built based on survey responses and/or event data.


Messages may be annotated with an indication of their relative importance; this information can be used in subsequent processing steps or by the natural language generation system 104 to make decisions about which information may be conveyed and which information may be suppressed. Alternatively or additionally, messages may include information on relationships between the one or more messages.


In some examples, one or more messages may be built based on raw input data, such as the time-series data in the following table:














Time
Heart Rate
Respiration Rate

















1
68
14


2
72
15


3
70
14


4
70
14


5
69
16


6
72
15


7
73
16


8
68
13


9
70
14


10
71
15


11
90
14


12
110
14


13
118
14


14
116
15


15
105
15


16
92
14


17
86
13


18
80
14


19
75
14


20
72
15


21
70
14


22
71
13


23
69
13


24
71
14









Using the heart rate data channel in the above table as an example, a message may include a patient or reference name, a period, a change in heart rate, a starting heart rate, a high heart rate and an ending heart rate. See, for example, message 308 in FIG. 3.


In some example embodiments, a natural language generation system, such as natural language generation system 104, is configured to generate phrases, sentences, text or the like which may take the form of natural language text. The natural language generation system 104 comprises a document planner 130, a microplanner 132 and/or a realizer 134. The natural language generation system 104 may also be in data communication with the message store 110, the domain model 112 and/or the linguistic resources 114. In some examples, the linguistic resources include, but are not limited to, text schemas, aggregation rules, reference rules, lexicalization rules and/or grammar rules that may be used by one or more of the document planner 130, the microplanner 132 and/or the realizer 134. Other natural language generation systems may be used in some example embodiments, such as a natural language generation system as described in Building Natural Language Generation Systems by Ehud Reiter and Robert Dale, Cambridge University Press (2000), which is incorporated by reference in its entirety herein.


The document planner 130 is configured to input the one or more messages from the message store 110. The document planner 130 is further configured to determine how to arrange those messages in order to describe the patterns in the one or more data channels derived from the raw input data. The document planner 130 may comprise a content determination process that is configured to select the messages, such as the messages that contain a representation of the data that is to be output via a natural language text.


The document planner 130 may also comprise a structuring process that determines the order of messages to be included in a text. In some example embodiments, the document planner 130 may access one or more text schemas for the purposes of content determination and document structuring. A text schema is a rule set that defines the order in which a number of messages are to be presented in a document. For example, an event message (e.g. medication injection) may be described prior to a key event message (e.g. rise in heart rate). In other examples, a significant event message (e.g. falling pulse) may be described after, but in relation to, a key event message (e.g. rise in heart rate). See, for example, document plan 302 in FIG. 3.


The output of the document planner 130 may be a tree-structured object or other data structure that is referred to as a document plan. In an instance in which a tree-structured object is chosen for the document plan, the leaf nodes of the tree may contain the messages, and the intermediate nodes of the tree structure object may be configured to indicate how the subordinate nodes are related (e.g. elaboration, consequence, contrast, sequence and/or the like) to each other, specify document structure (e.g. paragraph breaks) and/or the like.


The microplanner 132 is configured to construct a text specification based on the document plan from the document planner 130, such that the document plan may be expressed in natural language. In some example embodiments, the microplanner 132 may perform aggregation, lexicalization and referring expression generation. The microplanner 132 is further described with reference to FIG. 2.


A realizer 134 is configured to traverse a text specification output by the microplanner 132 to express the text specification in natural language. The realization process that is applied to each phrase specification in the text specification makes use of a grammar (e.g. the grammar of the linguistic resources 114) which specifies the valid syntactic constituents in the language and further provides a way of mapping from phrase specifications into the corresponding natural language sentences. The output of the process is, in some example embodiments, a well-formed natural language text. In some examples, the natural language text may include embedded mark-up.



FIG. 2 illustrates an example microplanner 132 according to some example embodiments described herein. The microplanner 132 may enable a user, such as via a user interface, to be able to write rules that map or otherwise specify how messages are converted into phrase specifications. For example, a user interface may include functionality that enables the user to convert messages into phrase specifications without a sophisticated knowledge of linguistics, such as by specifying genre conventions and/or lexicalization rules which may together define how message structures are mapped into phrase specifications. In some examples and in order to provide functionality that enables the user to convert messages into phrase specification, the microplanner 132 may include defaults and rules, such as lexicalization rules 202, aggregation rules 204, reference rules and/or genre parameters 208 that are applied in conjunction with or otherwise embodied by a lexicalization system 210, an aggregation system 212 and/or a reference system 214.


Referring now to FIG. 3, the microplanner 132 is configured to modify a document plan, such as document plan 302, to create a text specification, such as a text specification 304, for input into a realizer. As is shown in FIG. 3 and as is described herein, the document plan 302 may contain one or more leaf nodes that contain messages, such as message 308, message 2 and message n. Example message 308 comprises a plurality of slots that contain a named attribute and a value (e.g. channel and “HeartRate”). Message 308 also comprises slots that contain a named attribute and a set of named attributes and their values. Other messages may include additional named attributes and values.


Initially and in some example embodiments, the text specification may include a tree structure that matches or is otherwise structured in the same or similar manner as a document plan tree, such as is shown with respect to document plan 302 and text specification 304. In some examples, one or more messages may be combined (e.g. one or more document plan nodes), such as by the aggregation system 212 to form a single phrase specification (e.g. to form a single text specification node). Each leaf node of a text specification may include a phrase specification with one or more empty elements. The microplanner 132 may be configured to populate those element values by applying genre parameters, lexicalization rules, reference rules, aggregation rules and the like, such as is shown with respect to phrase specification 312.


In some example embodiments, the microplanner 132 may be configured to input a series of genre parameters 208 that are representative of genre conventions. Genre conventions are rules about the use of language which apply throughout texts in that particular genre. In some examples, however, the rules may be overridden by a user, by lexicalization rules and/or the like. The genre conventions are captured by the genre parameters 208 that specify default behavior for the linguistic realizer so that these aspects of language use do not have to continually re-specified by a user. Examples of genre parameters include, but are not limited to, the particular tense (e.g. past, present or future such as is shown with respect to phrase specification 312 of FIG. 3) that should be used consistently throughout the text to be generated; a convention on the use of pronouns in the text to be generated; and/or a convention as to whether or not abbreviated names are to be used in the text to be generated. Alternatively or additionally, other elements of the phrase specification may be set by the one or more genre conventions.


Genre conventions, in the form of genre parameters 208, may be applied by the microplanner 132 as a first step in the initialization of the phrase specification that corresponds to an individual message. In such a case, subsequently applied lexicalization rules may override the results of application of the genre parameters 208. Alternatively or additionally, genre parameters 208 may be applied by the microplanner 132 once all the lexicalization rules have been applied to a given message. In such a case, the genre parameters 208 are configured to populate the elements of the phrase specification that have not been specified or otherwise populated by the lexicalization rules. For example, a tense equal to past, as is shown with reference to phrase specification 312 of FIG. 3, may be set by genre parameter and/or a lexicalization rule.


In additional example embodiments, one or more lexicalization rules 202 may be input by the lexicalization system 210. Lexicalization rules 202 are rules that determine how the content of individual messages may be mapped into phrase specifications. In some examples, lexicalization rules may include, but are not limited to, message-level rules that are configured to apply to messages as a whole. Lexicalization rules 202 may also be configured to apply to one or more slots within each message. For example, message-level rules may specify how the overall form of a phrase is to be constructed from the contents of a message (e.g. heart rate is rising, falling or staying steady). Slot-level rules may specify how specific kinds of entities that are present in a message should be described (e.g. heart rate is expressed via a prepositional phrase such as “to 118 bpm”) or otherwise referred to (e.g. refer to a machine by its machine ID or full machine title). For example a message-level rule may map a name value and high rate value from a message to a phrase specification, such as is shown with respect to phrase specification 312 of FIG. 3.


For a given domain, such as the one or more domains defined by the domain model 112, there may be at least one message-level lexicalization rule for each type of message in the ontology for that domain that may be applied by the lexicalization system 210. The one or more lexicalization rules for a message type define one or more constraints that are configured to test the message itself, the discourse model (e.g. a model that is configured to store the relevant aspects of the discourse context, such as a list of entities mentioned in the text so far, and the lexicalization of the previous sentence in a text), parameters set by the document planner 130 and/or the genre parameters 208. In an instance in which the one or more lexicalization rules matches the constraints, a default lexicalization rule may be defined for each message type and/or slot type.


In one example, a message-level rule may be configured to specify a canned text string to be used whenever a message of the specified type is received as input. For example, a GREETING message might result in the simple text string “Hello friend”. Message-level lexicalization rules may also be configured to assign the contents of the slots of a message to particular syntactic constituents (e.g. a word or group of words that function as a single unit, such as a noun phrase, a verb phrase, a prepositional phrase or the like, within a hierarchical structure) in a sentence as represented by a phrase specification. For example, a lexicalization rule, or the one or more lexicalization rules, may be configured to specify the verb to be used to express a particular type of message, and slots in the message might be assigned to the subject and object positions in the sentence. In some examples, a user may allocate information in the one or more slots of a message to the elements of a phrase specification by using the following non-exhaustive list of syntactic constituents, subject (typically the first position in the sentence; verb: the main action described in the sentence), object (typically the position following the verb; indirectobject: used in those cases where a verb has three arguments, as in “John gave the cat a bath”), frontmodifier (used to provide information that will be placed at the beginning of the sentence, as in “yesterday, John gave the cat a bath”), premodifier (used to provide information that will be placed immediately in front of the verb, as in “John reluctantly gave the cat a bath”), postmodifier (used to provide information that will be placed immediately after the object, as in “John took a bus to the city”) and/or the like. Alternatively or additionally, a slot-level rule may be configured to specify a canned text string when a slot of a specified type is received and/or specify a slot to be mapped to a particular syntactic constituent in a sentence as represented by a phrase specification.


Alternatively or additionally, a message-level rule may also specify particular syntactic features of the sentence to be generated, such as by overriding default values for those features either as provided by the realizer itself or by the genre parameters 208. Typical features include but are not limited to tense, which may be set to past, present or future; aspect, which may be set to perfective or progressive; passive, which may be set to either true or false; negation and/or the like. In some example embodiments, a slot-level rule may specify a particular feature of a sentence to be generated, such as by overriding a default value. Alternatively or additionally, tense and aspect may be computed, such as by using a Reichenbachian model which is based on the time of the message (e.g. when the event described by the message happened), the time the text is generated, and/or a reference time. In some examples, reference time can be computed using one or more of the following non-exhaustive list: setting a reference time to the time of the previous message in the text specification, setting the reference time as the time of the first message expressed in a current paragraph and/or the like.


In some example embodiments, the lexicalization system 210 may also apply slot-level rules. Slot-level rules may be applied to each slot in each message to enable the slot to be mapped to an element of a phrase specification. In some example embodiments, the message-level rules described herein may also be expressed as slot-level rules, allowing recursive embedding. However, in some examples the value of the slot itself may be used to fill corresponding element in a phrase specification.


In some examples, the aggregation system 212 is configured to determine whether two or more phrase specifications can be combined together linguistically to produce a more complex sentence. For example, one or more other phrase specifications may be combined with phrase specification 312 to form a more complex sentence.


In some examples, a reference system 214 is configured to determine how to refer to an entity so that it can be unambiguously identified by the reader. For example, in a first sentence “John Smith” may be used where “he” or “his” may be used in subsequent sentences.


Alternatively or additionally, a slot-level rule may be executed by or in conjunction with the reference system 214. In such cases, the slot-level rule may specify how the value of the slot should be described based on the reference rules 206. Possible reference rules 206 include, but are not limited to, StringValue (indicating that a string value associated with the object should be used to refer to the object), Named Entity (indicating that a predefined reference strategy for named entities should be used to refer to the object and may include the choice between a full name or description, a reduced form of description, or a pronoun, on the basis of information about the other entities that have been referred to in the text), NumericValue (indicating that a predefined strategy for referring to numeric values should be used; TimeValue: indicates that a predefined reference strategy for referring to time values should be used to refer to the object), DurationValue (indicating that a predefined reference strategy for referring to durations should be used to refer to the object), EnumeratedValue (indicating how specific values of an enumerated type should be expressed) and/or the like.


In some example embodiments, the lexicalization system 210 may also use a slot-level rule to specify content for each of a number of syntactic constituents within a linguistic element that is to be realized as a noun phrase. For example, the following non-exhaustive example list of positions may be available: determiner, specifier, noun, modifier, premodifier, postmodifier and/or the like. In some examples, a slot-level rule may also contain conditions that determine its applicability; amongst other things, these may be used to determine when the rule should have a null output, resulting in the constituent being elided in the sentence being planned.


In some example embodiments, the lexicalization system 210 may also use one or more slot-level rules to specify syntactic features. For example, a slot level rule may specify the following non-exhaustive example list of syntactic features: pronominalisation (e.g. force a use of a pronoun), number (e.g. singular or plural), an indication of definite or indefinite and/or the like.



FIG. 4 is an example block diagram of an example computing device for practicing embodiments of an example configurable microplanner. In particular, FIG. 4 shows a computing system 400 that may be utilized to implement a natural language generation environment 100 having a natural language generation system 104 including, in some examples, a document planner 130, a microplanner 132 and/or a realizer 134; and/or a user interface 410. One or more general purpose or special purpose computing systems/devices may be used to implement the natural language generation system 104 and/or the user interface 410. In addition, the computing system 400 may comprise one or more distinct computing systems/devices and may span distributed locations. In some example embodiments, the natural language generation system 104 may be configured to operate remotely via the network 450. In other example embodiments, a pre-processing module or other module that requires heavy computational load may be configured to perform that computational load and thus may be on a remote device or server. For example, the realizer 134 may be accessed remotely. Furthermore, each block shown may represent one or more such blocks as appropriate to a specific example embodiment. In some cases one or more of the blocks may be combined with other blocks. Also, the natural language generation system 104 may be implemented in software, hardware, firmware, or in some combination to achieve the capabilities described herein.


In the example embodiment shown, computing system 400 comprises a computer memory (“memory”) 401, a display 402, one or more processors 403, input/output devices 404 (e.g., keyboard, mouse, CRT or LCD display, touch screen, gesture sensing device and/or the like), other computer-readable media 405, and communications interface 406. The processor 403 may, for example, be embodied as various means including one or more microprocessors with accompanying digital signal processor(s), one or more processor(s) without an accompanying digital signal processor, one or more coprocessors, one or more multi-core processors, one or more controllers, processing circuitry, one or more computers, various other processing elements including integrated circuits such as, for example, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA), or some combination thereof. Accordingly, although illustrated in FIG. 4 as a single processor, in some embodiments the processor 403 comprises a plurality of processors. The plurality of processors may be in operative communication with each other and may be collectively configured to perform one or more functionalities of the configurable microplanner as described herein.


The natural language generation system 104 is shown residing in memory 401. The memory 401 may comprise, for example, transitory and/or non-transitory memory, such as volatile memory, non-volatile memory, or some combination thereof. Although illustrated in FIG. 4 as a single memory, the memory 401 may comprise a plurality of memories. The plurality of memories may be embodied on a single computing device or may be distributed across a plurality of computing devices collectively configured to function as the configurable microplanner system. In various example embodiments, the memory 401 may comprise, for example, a hard disk, random access memory, cache memory, flash memory, a compact disc read only memory (CD-ROM), digital versatile disc read only memory (DVD-ROM), an optical disc, circuitry configured to store information, or some combination thereof.


In other embodiments, some portion of the contents, some or all of the components of the natural language generation system 104 may be stored on and/or transmitted over the other computer-readable media 405. The components of the natural language generation system 104 preferably execute on one or more processors 403 and are configured to enable operation of a configurable microplanner, as described herein.


Alternatively or additionally, other code or programs 430 (e.g., an administrative interface, a Web server, and the like) and potentially other data repositories, such as other data sources 440, also reside in the memory 401, and preferably execute on one or more processors 403. Of note, one or more of the components in FIG. 4 may not be present in any specific implementation. For example, some embodiments may not provide other computer readable media 405 or a display 402.


The natural language generation system 104 is further configured to provide functions such as those described with reference to FIG. 1. The natural language generation system 104 may interact with the network 450, via the communications interface 406, with remote data sources 456 (e.g. remote reference data, remote lexicalization rules, remote aggregation data, remote genre parameters and/or the like), third-party content providers 454 and/or client devices 458. The network 450 may be any combination of media (e.g., twisted pair, coaxial, fiber optic, radio frequency), hardware (e.g., routers, switches, repeaters, transceivers), and protocols (e.g., TCP/IP, UDP, Ethernet, Wi-Fi, WiMAX, Bluetooth) that facilitate communication between remotely situated humans and/or devices. In some instance the network 450 may take the form of the internet or may be embodied by a cellular network such as an LTE based network. In this regard, the communications interface 406 may be capable of operating with one or more air interface standards, communication protocols, modulation types, access types, and/or the like. The client devices 458 include desktop computing systems, notebook computers, mobile phones, smart phones, personal digital assistants, tablets and/or the like.


In an example embodiment, components/modules of the natural language generation system 104 are implemented using standard programming techniques. For example, the natural language generation system 104 may be implemented as a “native” executable running on the processor 403, along with one or more static or dynamic libraries. In other embodiments, the natural language generation system 104 may be implemented as instructions processed by a virtual machine that executes as one of the other programs 430. In general, a range of programming languages known in the art may be employed for implementing such example embodiments, including representative implementations of various programming language paradigms, including but not limited to, object-oriented (e.g., Java, C++, C#, Visual Basic.NET, Smalltalk, and the like), functional (e.g., ML, Lisp, Scheme, and the like), procedural (e.g., C, Pascal, Ada, Modula, and the like), scripting (e.g., Pen, Ruby, Python, JavaScript, VBScript, and the like), and declarative (e.g., SQL, Prolog, and the like).


The embodiments described above may also use synchronous or asynchronous client-server computing techniques. Also, the various components may be implemented using more monolithic programming techniques, for example, as an executable running on a single processor computer system, or alternatively decomposed using a variety of structuring techniques, including but not limited to, multiprogramming, multithreading, client-server, or peer-to-peer, running on one or more computer systems each having one or more processors. Some embodiments may execute concurrently and asynchronously, and communicate using message passing techniques. Equivalent synchronous embodiments are also supported. Also, other functions could be implemented and/or performed by each component/module, and in different orders, and by different components/modules, yet still achieve the described functions.


In addition, programming interfaces to the data stored as part of the natural language generation system 104, such as by using one or more application programming interfaces can be made available by mechanisms such as through application programming interfaces (API) (e.g. C, C++, C#, and Java); libraries for accessing files, databases, or other data repositories; through scripting languages such as XML; or through Web servers, FTP servers, or other types of servers providing access to stored data. The message store 110, the domain model 112 and/or the linguistic resources 114 may be implemented as one or more database systems, file systems, or any other technique for storing such information, or any combination of the above, including implementations using distributed computing techniques. Alternatively or additionally, the message store 110, the domain model 112 and/or the linguistic resources 114 may be local data stores but may also be configured to access data from the remote data sources 456.


Different configurations and locations of programs and data are contemplated for use with techniques described herein. A variety of distributed computing techniques are appropriate for implementing the components of the illustrated embodiments in a distributed manner including but not limited to TCP/IP sockets, RPC, RMI, HTTP, Web Services (XML-RPC, JAX-RPC, SOAP, and the like). Other variations are possible. Also, other functionality could be provided by each component/module, or existing functionality could be distributed amongst the components/modules in different ways, yet still achieve the functions described herein.


Furthermore, in some embodiments, some or all of the components of the natural language generation system 104 may be implemented or provided in other manners, such as at least partially in firmware and/or hardware, including, but not limited to one or more ASICs, standard integrated circuits, controllers executing appropriate instructions, and including microcontrollers and/or embedded controllers, FPGAs, complex programmable logic devices (“CPLDs”), and the like. Some or all of the system components and/or data structures may also be stored as contents (e.g., as executable or other machine-readable software instructions or structured data) on a computer-readable medium so as to enable or configure the computer-readable medium and/or one or more associated computing systems or devices to execute or otherwise use or provide the contents to perform at least some of the described techniques. Some or all of the system components and data structures may also be stored as data signals (e.g., by being encoded as part of a carrier wave or included as part of an analog or digital propagated signal) on a variety of computer-readable transmission mediums, which are then transmitted, including across wireless-based and wired/cable-based mediums, and may take a variety of forms (e.g., as part of a single or multiplexed analog signal, or as multiple discrete digital packets or frames). Such computer program products may also take other forms in other embodiments. Accordingly, embodiments of this disclosure may be practiced with other computer system configurations.



FIGS. 5 through 8 illustrate example flowcharts of the operations performed by an apparatus, such as computing system 400 of FIG. 4, in accordance with example embodiments of the present invention. It will be understood that each block of the flowcharts, and combinations of blocks in the flowcharts, may be implemented by various means, such as hardware, firmware, one or more processors, circuitry and/or other devices associated with execution of software including one or more computer program instructions. For example, one or more of the procedures described above may be embodied by computer program instructions. In this regard, the computer program instructions which embody the procedures described above may be stored by a memory 401 of an apparatus employing an embodiment of the present invention and executed by a processor 403 in the apparatus. As will be appreciated, any such computer program instructions may be loaded onto a computer or other programmable apparatus (e.g., hardware) to produce a machine, such that the resulting computer or other programmable apparatus provides for implementation of the functions specified in the flowcharts' block(s). These computer program instructions may also be stored in a non-transitory computer-readable storage memory that may direct a computer or other programmable apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable storage memory produce an article of manufacture, the execution of which implements the function specified in the flowcharts' block(s). The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable apparatus to cause a series of operations to be performed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce a computer-implemented process such that the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide operations for implementing the functions specified in the flowcharts' block(s). As such, the operations of FIGS. 5 through 8, when executed, convert a computer or processing circuitry into a particular machine configured to perform an example embodiment of the present invention. Accordingly, the operations of FIGS. 5 through 8 define an algorithm for configuring a computer or processor, to perform an example embodiment. In some cases, a general purpose computer may be provided with an instance of the processor which performs the algorithm of FIGS. 5 through 8 to transform the general purpose computer into a particular machine configured to perform an example embodiment.


Accordingly, blocks of the flowchart support combinations of means for performing the specified functions and combinations of operations for performing the specified functions. It will also be understood that one or more blocks of the flowcharts', and combinations of blocks in the flowchart, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based computer systems which perform the specified functions, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.


In some example embodiments, certain ones of the operations herein may be modified or further amplified as described below. Moreover, in some embodiments additional optional operations may also be included (some examples of which are shown in dashed lines in FIG. 7). It should be appreciated that each of the modifications, optional additions or amplifications described herein may be included with the operations herein either alone or in combination with any others among the features described herein.



FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating an example method for lexicalizing a message performed by a configurable microplanner according to some example embodiments. In block 502, a lexicalization rule for a message type whose one or more constraints are satisfied by at least one of a message, a document plan, a discourse model and/or a genre is identified. At decision block 504, if a lexicalization rule is not identified, then at block 506, a default lexicalization rule for the message type is identified. In some examples, a default rule may not be available and, in such cases, an error is signaled.


If a lexicalization rule is identified at decision block 504 or a default lexicalization rule is identified at block 506, then at block 508, a blank phrase specification is created, such as a phrase specification for a clause. At block 510, the lexicalization rule is caused to be executed by iterating though the syntactic features and/or syntactic constituents specified by the lexicalization rule.


At decision block 512, it is determined whether a lexicalization rule specifies a constant value. If a constant value is specified, then at block 514, a corresponding syntactic feature and/or syntactic constituent of a phrase specification is set to the constant value and the process continues to decision block 520. If a constant value is not specified, then the process continues to decision block 516. At decision block 516, it is determined whether the lexicalization rule specifies a slot of the message. If the lexicalization rule specifies a slot of the message, then at block 518, a slot-level rule, such as is described with respect to FIG. 6, is applied to the slot and the corresponding syntactic feature and/or syntactic constituent of a phrase specification is set to the result of the slot-level rule. The process then continues to decision block 520. If a lexicalization rule does not specify a slot of the message the process also continues to decision block 520. In some example embodiments, if the lexicalization rule neither specifies a constant value nor a slot of the message, then an error is signaled.


At decision block 520, it is determined whether each of the syntactic features and/or syntactic constituents specified by the lexicalization rule has been iterated through by the process. If each of the syntactic features and/or syntactic constituents specified by the lexicalization rule has been iterated through then the process continues to decision block 522. Otherwise the process loops back to block 510.


At decision block 522, it is determined whether the lexicalization rule or a genre parameter specifies a tense and/or aspect. If tense or aspect is specified by either the lexicalization rule or a genre parameter, then the process ends at block 526. If a tense and/or aspect are not specified, then at block 524, tense and/or aspect are computed, such as by using a Reichenbach model. After tense and aspect are computed the process ends at block 526.



FIG. 6 is a flowchart illustrating an example method for lexicalizing a slot according to some example embodiments. In block 602, a lexicalization rule for a slot type whose one or more constraints are satisfied by a slot value, a message containing the slot, a document plan, a discourse model and/or a genre is identified. At decision block 604, if a lexicalization rule is not identified, then at block 606, a default lexicalization rule for the slot type is identified. In some examples, a default rule may not be available and, in such cases, an error is signaled.


If a lexicalization rule is identified at decision block 604 or a default lexicalization rule is identified at block 606, then at block 608, a blank phrase specification is created, such as a phrase specification for a noun phrase. At block 610, the lexicalization rule is caused to be executed by iterating though the syntactic features and syntactic constituents specified by the lexicalization rule.


At decision block 612, it is determined whether a lexicalization rule specifies a constant value. If a constant value is specified, then at block 614, a corresponding syntactic feature and/or syntactic constituent of a phrase specification is set to the constant value. The process then continues to decision block 628. If a constant value is not specified the process continues to decision block 616. At decision block 616, it is determined whether a lexicalization rule specifies a slot value. If the lexicalization rule specifies a slot value then at block 618, a representation (e.g. string, float, integer, Boolean, time or the like) of the slot value is generated and the corresponding syntactic feature and/or syntactic constituent of a phrase specification is set to the representation. The process then continues to decision block 628. If the lexicalization rule specification does not specify a slot value the process continues to decision block 620.


At decision block 620, it is determined whether the lexicalization rule specifies a slot value that is a message or an ontology object. If the lexicalization rule specifies a slot value that is a message (e.g. a particular slot value is a message) or an ontology object, then at block 622, a slot-level rule is caused to be invoked for the slot value and the corresponding syntactic feature and/or syntactic constituent of a phrase specification is set to the result of the slot-level rule. The process then continues to decision block 628. If the lexicalization rule does not specify a slot value that is a message or an ontology object the process continues to decision block 624.


At decision block 624, it is determined whether the lexicalization rule specifies information in another slot of the message. For example, the slot-level rule may operate on endValue of message 308 of FIG. 3; however the lexicalization rule may also specify that unit information (e.g. “bpm”) may be found in another slot in the message. If the lexicalization rule specifies a message slot, then at block 626, a slot-level rule is caused to be invoked for the message slot and the corresponding syntactic feature and/or syntactic constituent of a phrase specification is set to the result of the slot-level rule. The process then continues to decision block 628. If the lexicalization rule does not specify a message slot in decision block 624, the process also continues to decision block 628. In some example embodiments, if the lexicalization rule neither specifies a constant value, a slot value, a slot value that is a message or an ontology object nor information in another slot of the message, then an error is signaled.


At decision block 628, it is determined whether each of the syntactic features and/or syntactic constituents specified by the lexicalization rule has been iterated through. If each of the syntactic features and/or syntactic constituents specified by the lexicalization rule has been iterated through, then the process ends at block 630. Otherwise the process loops back to block 610.



FIG. 7 is a flowchart illustrating an example method performed by a configurable microplanner, in some example embodiments. As is shown in operation 702, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for accessing a document plan containing one or more messages. As is shown in operation 704, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for generating a text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the one or more messages in the document plan. In some example embodiments the text specification is a tree structured object that corresponds to the tree structured object of the document plan.


As is shown in operation 706, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for populating the one or more phrase specifications using one or more genre conventions. In some example embodiments, the one or more genre conventions are expressed as one or more defaults that define a language in a particular genre. The one or more defaults that are configured to define the language in the particular genre may comprise at least one of the following example defaults: a chosen tense, a convention for the use of pronouns or a convention for the use of abbreviations.


As is shown in operation 708, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the lexicalization system 210, the processor 403, or the like, for applying a set of lexicalization rules to each of the one or more messages to populate the one or more phrase specifications. In some example embodiments, the set of lexicalization rules are specified using a microplanning rule specification language that is configured to hide linguistic complexities from a user and comprise a set of message-level rules and a set of slot-level rules. The set of lexicalization rules are configured to map content from a message of the one or more messages into a phrase specification of the one or more phrase specifications. Further, the lexicalization rules are configured to identify one or more correspondences between a structure of the one or more messages and a linguistic output that is used to express the structure of the one or more messages and/or to identify one or more correspondences between a structure of the one or more messages and one or more natural language syntactic constituents that are used to express a linguistic output and a structure of the one or more messages.


In some example embodiments, the microplanning rule specification language is configured to fill syntactic constituents using one or more message-level rules. The microplanning rule specification language expresses syntactic constituents using at least one of a subject, verb, object, indirect object, front modifier, premodifier, post modifier and/or the like. In further examples, the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express syntactic constituents within noun phrases using one or more slot-level rules by using at least one of a determiner, specifier, noun, modifier, premodifier or post modifier.


In some example embodiments, the set of message-level rules apply to the one or more messages and the set of slot-level rules apply to one or more slots that are defined by the one or more messages. The set of message-level rules comprises one or more rules for each type of message, the one or more rules are configured to indicate how the content of the one or more messages of each type of message are to be used to populate the one or more elements of the one or more phrase specifications corresponding to each type of message.


As is shown in operation 710, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the reference system 214, the processor 403, or the like, for applying one or more reference strategies. As is shown in operation 712, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the aggregation system 212, the processor 403, or the like, for aggregating at least two phrases specifications of the one or more phrase specifications on the basis of the contents of the phrase specifications, properties of the text specification and the lexicalization rules that produced the at least two phrase specifications. As is shown in operation 714, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for causing the one or more phrase specifications in the text specification to be output to a realizer.



FIG. 8 is a flowchart illustrating an example method performed by a configurable microplanner. As is shown in operation 802, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for accessing a document plan containing one or more messages. As is shown in operation 804, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for generating a text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the one or more messages in the document plan. In some example embodiments the text specification is a tree structured object that corresponds to the tree structured object of the document plan.


As is shown in operation 806, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the lexicalization system 210, the processor 403, or the like, for applying a set of lexicalization rules to each of the one or more messages to populate the one or more phrase specifications. In some example embodiments, the set of lexicalization rules are specified using a microplanning rule specification language that is configured to hide linguistic complexities from a user and comprise a set of message-level rules and a set of slot-level rules. The set of lexicalization rules are configured to map content from a message of the one or more messages into a phrase specification of the one or more phrase specifications. Further, the lexicalization rules are configured to identify one or more correspondences between a structure of the one or more messages and a linguistic output that is used to express the structure of the one or more messages and/or to identify one or more correspondences between a structure of the one or more messages and one or more natural language syntactic constituents that are used to express a linguistic output and a structure of the one or more messages.


In some example embodiments, the microplanning rule specification language is configured to fill syntactic constituents using one or more message-level rules. The microplanning rule specification language expresses syntactic constituents using at least one of a subject, verb, object, indirect object, front modifier, premodifier, post modifier and/or the like. In further examples, the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express syntactic constituents within noun phrases using one or more slot-level rules by using at least one of a determiner, specifier, noun, modifier, premodifier or post modifier.


In some example embodiments, the set of message-level rules apply to the one or more messages and the set of slot-level rules apply to one or more slots that are defined by the one or more messages. The set of messages level rules comprises one or more rules for each type of message, the one or more rules are configured to indicate how the content of the one or more messages of each type of message are to be used to populate one or more elements of the one or more phrase specifications corresponding to each type of message.


As is shown in operation 808, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the reference system 214, the processor 403, or the like, for applying one or more reference strategies. As is shown in operation 810, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the aggregation system 212, the processor 403, or the like, for aggregating at least two phrases specifications of the one or more phrase specifications on the basis of the contents of the phrase specifications, properties of the text specification and the lexicalization rules that produced the at least two phrase specifications.


As is shown in operation 812, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for populating the one or more empty elements in the one or more phrase specifications using one or more genre conventions. In some example embodiments, the one or more genre conventions are expressed as one or more defaults that define a language in a particular genre. As is shown in operation 814, an apparatus may include means, such as the microplanner 132, the processor 403, or the like, for causing the one or more phrase specifications in the text specification to be output to a realizer.


Many modifications and other embodiments of the inventions set forth herein will come to mind to one skilled in the art to which these inventions pertain having the benefit of the teachings presented in the foregoing descriptions and the associated drawings. Therefore, it is to be understood that the inventions are not to be limited to the specific embodiments disclosed and that modifications and other embodiments are intended to be included within the scope of the appended claims. Moreover, although the foregoing descriptions and the associated drawings describe example embodiments in the context of certain example combinations of elements and/or functions, it should be appreciated that different combinations of elements and/or functions may be provided by alternative embodiments without departing from the scope of the appended claims. In this regard, for example, different combinations of elements and/or functions than those explicitly described above are also contemplated as may be set forth in some of the appended claims. Although specific terms are employed herein, they are used in a generic and descriptive sense only and not for purposes of limitation.

Claims
  • 1. A computer-implemented method for transforming an input data stream comprising raw input data that is expressed in a non-linguistic format into a format that can be expressed linguistically in a textual output, the method comprising: receiving, using a processor, one or more rules written by a user via a user interface, wherein the user interface enables the user to define the one or more rules in at least a first format that is configured to hide linguistic complexities from the user;converting, using the processor, the one or more rules in a first format into a set of lexicalization rules in a second format that is configured to be processed by a natural language generation system, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are specified using a microplanning rule specification language that comprises a set of message-level rules and a set of slot-level rules, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to fill syntactic constituents using one or more message-level rules, and wherein message-level rules specify how an overall form of a phrase is to be constructed from message contents and slot-level rules specify how specific entities present in a message should be described or otherwise referred to;generating, using the processor, at least one data structure based on the input data stream comprising raw input data that is expressed in a non-linguistic format, wherein the at least one data structure represents a phrase or a simple sentence and is created in an instance in which the input data stream comprises data that satisfies one or more predetermined requirements, wherein the one or more predetermined requirements are selected based in part on a domain associated with the textual output;applying, using the natural language generation system operating on the processor, the set of lexicalization rules to the at least one data structure to generate a text specification, wherein the at least one data structure is generated based on the input data stream;realizing, using the processor, the text specification to generate the textual output that linguistically describes at least a portion of the input data stream; andoutputting, using the processor, the textual output to the user interface.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one data structure is a message, wherein the set of lexicalization rules comprise the one or more rules written by the user and at least one pre-generated rule.
  • 3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: accessing, using the processor, a document plan containing the at least one data structure; andgenerating, using the processor, the text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the at least one data structure in the document plan, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are configured to be applied to each of the one or more messages to populate the one or more phrase specifications.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: accessing, using the processor, a document plan containing the at least one data structure; andgenerating, using the processor, the text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the at least one data structure in the document plan, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are configured to be applied to the at least one data structure to populate the one or more phrase specifications.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express the syntactic constituents using at least one of a subject, verb, object, indirect object, front modifier, premodifier or post modifier.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express syntactic constituents using one or more slot-level rules, and wherein the microplanning rule specification language is further configured to express syntactic constituents within a noun phrase using at least one of a determiner, specifier, noun, modifier, premodifier or post modifier.
  • 7. The method of claim 6, further comprising: populating, using the processor, one or more phrase specifications in the text specification using one or more genre conventions, wherein the one or more genre conventions are expressed as one or more genre parameters that define a language in a particular genre, wherein the text specification is a tree structured object.
  • 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the one or more genre parameters that define the language in the particular genre comprise at least one of a chosen tense, a convention for the use of pronouns or a convention for the use of abbreviations.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one data structure is generated based on an event detected in or inferred from the input data stream.
  • 10. An apparatus that is configured to transform an input data stream comprising raw input data that is expressed in a non-linguistic format into a format that can be expressed linguistically in a textual output, the apparatus comprising: at least one processor; andat least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to at least:receive one or more rules written by a user via a user interface, wherein the user interface enables the user to define the one or more rules in at least a first format that is configured to hide linguistic complexities from the user;convert the one or more rules in a first format into a set of lexicalization rules in a second format that is configured to be processed by a natural language generation system, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are specified using a microplanning rule specification language that comprises a set of message-level rules and a set of slot-level rules, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to fill syntactic constituents using one or more message-level rules, and wherein message-level rules specify how an overall form of a phrase is to be constructed from message contents and slot-level rules specify how specific entities present in a message should be described or otherwise referred to;generate at least one data structure based on the input data stream comprising raw input data that is expressed in a non-linguistic format, wherein the at least one data structure represents a phrase or a simple sentence and is created in an instance in which the input data stream comprises data that satisfies one or more predetermined requirements, wherein the one or more predetermined requirements are selected based in part on a domain associated with the textual output;apply the set of lexicalization rules to the at least one data structure to generate a text specification in the natural language generation system, wherein the at least one data structure is generated based on the input data stream;realize the text specification to generate the textual output that linguistically describes at least a portion of the input data stream; andoutput the textual output to the user interface.
  • 11. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the at least one data structure is a message, wherein the set of lexicalization rules comprise the one or more rules written by the user and at least one pre-generated rule.
  • 12. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, further is configured to cause the apparatus to at least: access a document plan containing the at least one data structure; andgenerate the text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the at least one data structure in the document plan, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are configured to be applied to each of the one or more messages to populate the one or more phrase specifications.
  • 13. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, further is configured to cause the apparatus to at least: access a document plan containing the at least one data structure; andgenerate the text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the at least one data structure in the document plan, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are configured to be applied to the at least one data structure to populate the one or more phrase specifications.
  • 14. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express the syntactic constituents using at least one of a subject, verb, object, indirect object, front modifier, premodifier or post modifier.
  • 15. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express syntactic constituents using one or more slot level rules, and wherein the microplanning rule specification language is further configured to express syntactic constituents within a noun phrase using at least one of a determiner, specifier, noun, modifier, premodifier or post modifier.
  • 16. The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, further is configured to cause the apparatus to at least: populate one or more phrase specifications in the text specification using one or more genre conventions, wherein the one or more genre conventions are expressed as one or more genre parameters that define a language in a particular genre, wherein the text specification is a tree structured object.
  • 17. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the one or more genre parameters that define the language in the particular genre comprise at least one of a chosen tense, a convention for the use of pronouns or a convention for the use of abbreviations.
  • 18. An computer program product that is configured to transform an input data stream comprising raw input data that is expressed in a non-linguistic format into a format that can be expressed linguistically in a textual output, the computer program product comprising: at least one computer readable non-transitory memory medium having program code instructions stored thereon, the program code instructions which when executed by an apparatus cause the apparatus at least to:receive one or more rules written by a user via a user interface, wherein the user interface enables the user to define the one or more rules in at least a first format that is configured to hide linguistic complexities from the user;convert the one or more rules in a first format into a set of lexicalization rules in a second format that is configured to be processed by a natural language generation system, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are specified using a microplanning rule specification language that comprises a set of message-level rules and a set of slot-level rules, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to fill syntactic constituents using one or more message-level rules, and wherein message-level rules specify how an overall form of a phrase is to be constructed from message contents and slot-level rules specify how specific entities present in a message should be described or otherwise referred to;generate at least one data structure based on the input data stream comprising raw input data that is expressed in a non-linguistic format, wherein the at least one data structure represents a phrase or a simple sentence and is created in an instance in which the input data stream comprises data that satisfies one or more predetermined requirements, wherein the one or more predetermined requirements are selected based in part on a domain associated with the textual output;apply the set of lexicalization rules to the at least one data structure to generate a text specification in the natural language generation system, wherein the at least one data structure is generated based on the input data stream;realize the text specification to generate the textual output that linguistically describes at least a portion of the input data stream; andoutput the textual output to the user interface.
  • 19. The computer program product of claim 18, wherein the program code instructions which when executed by an apparatus further cause the apparatus at least to: access a document plan containing the at least one data structure; andgenerate the text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the at least one data structure in the document plan, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are configured to be applied to each of the one or more messages to populate the one or more phrase specifications.
  • 20. The computer program product of claim 18, wherein the program code instructions which when executed by an apparatus further cause the apparatus at least to: access a document plan containing the at least one data structure; andgenerate the text specification containing one or more phrase specifications that correspond to the at least one data structure in the document plan, wherein the set of lexicalization rules are configured to be applied to the at least one data structure to populate the one or more phrase specifications.
  • 21. The computer program product of claim 18, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express the syntactic constituents using at least one of a subject, verb, object, indirect object, front modifier, premodifier or post modifier.
  • 22. The computer program product of claim 18, wherein the microplanning rule specification language is configured to express syntactic constituents using one or more slot-level rules, and wherein the microplanning rule specification language is further configured to express syntactic constituents within a noun phrase using at least one of a determiner, specifier, noun, modifier, premodifier or post modifier.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/634,074, filed Feb. 27, 2015, which is a continuation of International Application No. PCT/US2012/053156, filed Aug. 30, 2012, both of which are hereby incorporated herein in their entirety by reference.

US Referenced Citations (292)
Number Name Date Kind
5181250 Morgan et al. Jan 1993 A
5237502 White et al. Aug 1993 A
5311429 Tominaga May 1994 A
5321608 Namba et al. Jun 1994 A
5629687 Sutton et al. May 1997 A
5794177 Carus et al. Aug 1998 A
5802488 Edatsune Sep 1998 A
6023669 Suda et al. Feb 2000 A
6078914 Redfern Jun 2000 A
6138087 Budzinski Oct 2000 A
6266617 Evans Jul 2001 B1
6442485 Evans Aug 2002 B2
6466899 Yano et al. Oct 2002 B1
6665640 Bennett et al. Dec 2003 B1
6717513 Sandelman et al. Apr 2004 B1
6947885 Bangalore et al. Sep 2005 B2
6958746 Anderson Oct 2005 B1
7043420 Ratnaparkhi May 2006 B2
7111018 Goodrich Sep 2006 B1
7167824 Kallulli Jan 2007 B2
7231341 Bangalore et al. Jun 2007 B2
7238313 Ferencz et al. Jul 2007 B2
7305336 Polanyi et al. Dec 2007 B2
7310969 Dale Dec 2007 B2
7346493 Ringger et al. Mar 2008 B2
7418447 Caldwell et al. Aug 2008 B2
7424363 Cheng et al. Sep 2008 B2
7444287 Claudatos et al. Oct 2008 B2
7496621 Pan et al. Feb 2009 B2
7526424 Corston-Oliver et al. Apr 2009 B2
7533089 Pan et al. May 2009 B2
7562005 Bangalore et al. Jul 2009 B1
7653545 Starkie Jan 2010 B1
7684991 Stohr et al. Mar 2010 B2
7711581 Hood et al. May 2010 B2
7783486 Rosser et al. Aug 2010 B2
7809552 Pan et al. Oct 2010 B2
7849048 Langseth et al. Dec 2010 B2
7849049 Langseth et al. Dec 2010 B2
7856390 Schiller Dec 2010 B2
7873509 Budzinski Jan 2011 B1
7921091 Cox et al. Apr 2011 B2
7930169 Billerey-Mosier Apr 2011 B2
7933774 Begeja et al. Apr 2011 B1
7966172 Ruiz et al. Jun 2011 B2
7970601 Burmester et al. Jun 2011 B2
7979267 Ruiz et al. Jul 2011 B2
8019610 Walker et al. Sep 2011 B2
8024331 Calistri-Yeh et al. Sep 2011 B2
8037000 Delmonico et al. Oct 2011 B2
8082144 Brown et al. Dec 2011 B1
8090727 Lachtarnik et al. Jan 2012 B2
8150676 Kaeser Apr 2012 B1
8175873 Di Fabbrizio et al. May 2012 B2
8180647 Walker et al. May 2012 B2
8180758 Cornali May 2012 B1
8229937 Kiefer et al. Jul 2012 B2
8355903 Birnbaum et al. Jan 2013 B1
8374848 Birnbaum et al. Feb 2013 B1
8425325 Hope Apr 2013 B2
8473911 Baxter Jun 2013 B1
8494944 Schiller Jul 2013 B2
8515733 Jansen Aug 2013 B2
8515737 Allen Aug 2013 B2
8521512 Gorman et al. Aug 2013 B2
8548814 Manuel-Devadoss Oct 2013 B2
8548915 Antebi et al. Oct 2013 B2
8561014 Mengusoglu et al. Oct 2013 B2
8566090 Di Fabbrizio et al. Oct 2013 B2
8589148 Atallah et al. Nov 2013 B2
8589172 Alonso et al. Nov 2013 B2
8616896 Lennox Dec 2013 B2
8620669 Walker et al. Dec 2013 B2
8626613 Dale et al. Jan 2014 B2
8630844 Nichols et al. Jan 2014 B1
8655889 Hua et al. Feb 2014 B2
8676691 Schiller Mar 2014 B2
8688434 Birnbaum et al. Apr 2014 B1
8700396 Mengibar et al. Apr 2014 B1
8738384 Bansal et al. May 2014 B1
8738558 Antebi et al. May 2014 B2
8762134 Reiter May 2014 B2
8762133 Reiter Jun 2014 B2
8775161 Nichols et al. Jul 2014 B1
8825533 Basson et al. Sep 2014 B2
8843363 Birnbaum et al. Sep 2014 B2
8849670 Di Cristo 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
8898063 Sykes et al. Nov 2014 B1
8903711 Lundberg et al. Dec 2014 B2
8903718 Akuwudike Dec 2014 B2
8909595 Gandy et al. Dec 2014 B2
8914452 Boston et al. Dec 2014 B2
8924330 Antebi et al. Dec 2014 B2
8930178 Pestian et al. Jan 2015 B2
8930305 Namburu et al. Jan 2015 B2
8977953 Pierre et al. Mar 2015 B1
8984051 Olsen et al. Mar 2015 B2
9002695 Watanabe et al. Apr 2015 B2
9002869 Riezler et al. Apr 2015 B2
9015730 Allen et al. Apr 2015 B1
9028260 Nanjiani et al. May 2015 B2
9092276 Allen et al. Jul 2015 B2
9104720 Rakshit et al. Aug 2015 B2
9110882 Overell et al. Aug 2015 B2
9110977 Pierre et al. Aug 2015 B1
9111534 Sylvester et al. Aug 2015 B1
9135244 Reiter Sep 2015 B2
9135662 Evenhouse et al. Sep 2015 B2
9146904 Allen Sep 2015 B2
9164982 Kaeser Oct 2015 B1
9190054 Riley et al. Nov 2015 B1
9208147 Nichols et al. Dec 2015 B1
9229927 Wolfram et al. Jan 2016 B2
9240197 Begeja et al. Jan 2016 B2
9244894 Dale et al. Jan 2016 B1
9251134 Birnbaum et al. Feb 2016 B2
9251143 Bird et al. Feb 2016 B2
9263039 Di Cristo et al. Feb 2016 B2
9268770 Kursun Feb 2016 B1
9323743 Reiter Apr 2016 B2
9405448 Reiter Aug 2016 B2
9640045 Reiter May 2017 B2
10026274 Reiter Jul 2018 B2
20020026306 Bangalore et al. Feb 2002 A1
20030131315 Escher Jul 2003 A1
20030212545 Kallulli Nov 2003 A1
20030229605 Herrera Dec 2003 A1
20030233230 Ammicht Dec 2003 A1
20040044515 Metcalf Mar 2004 A1
20040246120 Benner et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050039107 Hander Feb 2005 A1
20050108001 Aarskog May 2005 A1
20050228635 Araki et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050256703 Markel Nov 2005 A1
20060020916 Allison Jan 2006 A1
20060085667 Kubota et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060136196 Brun Jun 2006 A1
20060178868 Billerey-Mosier Aug 2006 A1
20060224638 Wald Oct 2006 A1
20060259293 Orwant Nov 2006 A1
20070038643 Epstein Feb 2007 A1
20070078655 Semkow et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070106628 Adjali et al. May 2007 A1
20070129942 Ban et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143099 Balchandran et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143278 Srivastava Jun 2007 A1
20070156677 Szabo Jul 2007 A1
20070219773 Roux Sep 2007 A1
20080005005 Billieux Jan 2008 A1
20080221865 Wellmann Sep 2008 A1
20080221870 Attardi et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080281781 Zhao et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080312954 Ullrich et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090089100 Nenov et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090089126 Odubiyi Apr 2009 A1
20090111486 Burstrom Apr 2009 A1
20090138258 Neale May 2009 A1
20090156229 Hein et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090177929 Sijelmassi Jul 2009 A1
20090182549 Anisimovich Jul 2009 A1
20090198496 Denecke Aug 2009 A1
20090281839 Lynn et al. Nov 2009 A1
20090286514 Lichorowic et al. Nov 2009 A1
20090287567 Penberthy et al. Nov 2009 A1
20100010802 Ruano Jan 2010 A1
20100146491 Hirano et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100153095 Yang et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100174545 Otani Jul 2010 A1
20100191658 Kannan et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100203970 Hope Aug 2010 A1
20100210379 Shelley Aug 2010 A1
20100217737 Shama Aug 2010 A1
20100332235 David Dec 2010 A1
20110010164 Williams Jan 2011 A1
20110035210 Rosenfeld Feb 2011 A1
20110068929 Franz et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110087486 Schiller Apr 2011 A1
20110113382 Cannon May 2011 A1
20110160986 Wu et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110179006 Cox et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110184959 Maxwell, III Jul 2011 A1
20110218822 Buisman et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110225185 Gupta Sep 2011 A1
20110257839 Mukherjee Oct 2011 A1
20110307435 Overell et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110313757 Hoover et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120004903 Pillai Jan 2012 A1
20120078888 Brown et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120084027 Caine Apr 2012 A1
20120136649 Freising et al. May 2012 A1
20120158089 Bocek et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120173475 Ash et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120174018 Ash Jul 2012 A1
20120232919 Wilson Sep 2012 A1
20120290289 Manera et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120290310 Watson Nov 2012 A1
20120310990 Viegas et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130030810 Kopparapu et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130066873 Salvetti et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130138428 Chandramouli et al. May 2013 A1
20130144606 Birnbaum et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130145242 Birnbaum et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130151238 Beaurpere et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130174026 Locke Jul 2013 A1
20130185050 Bird et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130185056 Ingram et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130211855 Eberle et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130238329 Casella dos Santos Sep 2013 A1
20130238330 Casella dos Santos Sep 2013 A1
20130238987 Lutwyche Sep 2013 A1
20130251233 Yang et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130268263 Park et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130293363 Plymouth et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130311201 Chatfield et al. Nov 2013 A1
20140019531 Czajka et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140025371 Min Jan 2014 A1
20140039878 Wasson Feb 2014 A1
20140052696 Soroushian Feb 2014 A1
20140062712 Reiter Mar 2014 A1
20140067377 Reiter Mar 2014 A1
20140072947 Boguraev et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140072948 Boguraev et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140089212 Sbodio Mar 2014 A1
20140100846 Haine et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140100901 Haine et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140100923 Strezo et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140143720 Dimarco et al. May 2014 A1
20140149107 Schilder May 2014 A1
20140164303 Bagchi et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140164304 Bagchi et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140188477 Zhang Jul 2014 A1
20140278358 Byron et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140281935 Byron et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140281951 Megiddo et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140297268 Govrin et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140316768 Khandekar Oct 2014 A1
20140375466 Reiter Dec 2014 A1
20140379322 Koutrika et al. Dec 2014 A1
20140379378 Cohen-Solal et al. Dec 2014 A1
20150006437 Byron et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150032443 Karov et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150081299 Jasinschi et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150081307 Cederstrom et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150081321 Jain Mar 2015 A1
20150095015 Lani et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150106307 Antebi et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150142418 Byron et al. May 2015 A1
20150142421 Buurman et al. May 2015 A1
20150154359 Harris et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150163358 Klemm et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150169522 Logan et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150169548 Reiter Jun 2015 A1
20150169659 Lee et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150169720 Byron et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150169737 Bryon et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150179082 Byron et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150227508 Howald et al. Aug 2015 A1
20150242384 Reiter Aug 2015 A1
20150261744 Suenbuel et al. Sep 2015 A1
20150261836 Madhani et al. Sep 2015 A1
20150279348 Cao et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150310013 Allen et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150310112 Allen et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150310861 Waltermann et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150324343 Carter et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150324347 Bradshaw et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150324351 Sripada et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150324374 Sripada et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150324413 Gubin et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150325000 Sripada Nov 2015 A1
20150326622 Carter et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150331845 Guggilla et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150331846 Guggilla et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150332670 Akbacak et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150347400 Sripada Dec 2015 A1
20150356127 Pierre et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150363363 Bohra et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150363364 Sripada Dec 2015 A1
20150363382 Bohra et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150363390 Mungi et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150363391 Mungi et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150371651 Aharoni et al. Dec 2015 A1
20160019200 Allen Jan 2016 A1
20160027125 Bryce Jan 2016 A1
20160055150 Bird et al. Feb 2016 A1
20160140090 Dale et al. May 2016 A1
20160328385 Reiter Nov 2016 A1
20170018107 Reiter Jan 2017 A1
20190035232 Reiter Jan 2019 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (43)
Number Date Country
2011247830 Dec 2011 AU
2011253627 Dec 2011 AU
2013201755 Sep 2013 AU
2013338351 May 2015 AU
2577721 Mar 2006 CA
2826116 Mar 2006 CA
103999081 Aug 2014 CN
104182059 Dec 2014 CN
104881320 Sep 2015 CN
1 336 955 May 2006 EP
2707809 Mar 2014 EP
2750759 Jul 2014 EP
2849103 Mar 2015 EP
2518192 Mar 2015 GB
61-221873 Oct 1986 JP
2004-21791 Jan 2004 JP
2014165766 Sep 2014 JP
WO-2000074394 Dec 2000 WO
WO-2002031628 Apr 2002 WO
WO-2002073449 Sep 2002 WO
WO-2002073531 Sep 2002 WO
WO-2002031628 Oct 2002 WO
WO-2006010044 Jan 2006 WO
WO-2007041221 Apr 2007 WO
WO-2009014465 Jan 2009 WO
WO-2010049925 May 2010 WO
WO-2010051404 May 2010 WO
WO-2012071571 May 2012 WO
WO 2013009613 Jan 2013 WO
WO-2013042115 Mar 2013 WO
WO-2013042116 Mar 2013 WO
WO 2013177280 Nov 2013 WO
WO 2014035402 Mar 2014 WO
WO 2014098560 Jun 2014 WO
WO 2014140977 Sep 2014 WO
WO 2014187076 Nov 2014 WO
WO 2015028844 Mar 2015 WO
WO 2015113301 Aug 2015 WO
WO 2015148278 Oct 2015 WO
WO 2015159133 Oct 2015 WO
WO 2015164253 Oct 2015 WO
WO 2015175338 Nov 2015 WO
WO 2016004266 Jan 2016 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (104)
Entry
U.S. Appl. No. 14/914,461, filed Feb. 25, 2016; In re: Reiter et al., entitled Text Generation From Correlated Alerts.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/022,420, filed Mar. 16, 2016; In re: Mahamood, entitlted Method and Apparatus for Document Planning.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/093,337, filed Apr. 7, 2016; In re: Reiter, entitled Method and Apparatus for Referring Expression Generation.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/093,365, filed Apr. 7, 2016; In re: Logan et al., entitled Method and Apparatus for Updating a Previously Generated Text.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2013/050375 dated May 7, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/053128 dated Jun. 27, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/053156 dated Sep. 26, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2012/057773 dated Jul. 1, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2012/057774 dated Sep. 20, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2012/056513 dated Jun. 26, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2012/056514 dated Jun. 26, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/053183 dated Jun. 4, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/061051 dated Jul. 24, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/063343; dated Jan. 15, 2014.
International Search Report for Application No. PCT/IB2013/058131 dated Jul. 3, 2014.
Alawneh, A. L. et al., Pattern Recognition Techniques Applied to the Abstraction of Traces of Inter-Process Communication, Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR), 2011 15th European Conference on Year: 2011; IEEE Conference Publications (2011) pp. 211-220.
Andre, E. et al., From Visual Data to Multimedia Presentations, Grounding Representations: Integration of Sensory Inforamtion in Natural Language Processing, Artificial Intelligence and Neural networks, IEE Colloquium On (May 15, 1995) pp. 1-3.
Andre, E. et al., Natural Language Access to Visual Data: Dealing wtih Space and Movement, Report 63, German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI) SFB 314; Project VITRA, (Nov. 1989) 1-21.
Barzilay, R., et al.; “Aggregation via Set Partitioning for Natural Language Generation;” Proceeding of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL; pp. 359-366; dated Jun. 2006.
Bhoedjang, R. A. F. et. al., Optimizing Distributed Data Structures Using Application-Specific Network Interface Software, Parallel Processing, 1998, Proceedings; 1998 International Conference on Year: 1998, IEEE Conference Publications (1998) pp. 485-492.
Cappozzo, A. et al., Surface-Maker Cluster Design Criteria for 3-D Bone Movement Reconstruction, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 44, No. 12 (Dec. 1997) 1165-.
Dragon, R. et al., Multi-Scale Clustering of Frame-to-Frame Correspondences for Motion Segmentation, Computer Vision ECCV 2012, Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Oct. 7, 2012) 445-458.
Gatt, A. et al., From Data to Text in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Using NLG Technology for Decision Support and Information Management, AI Communication (Jan. 1, 2009) 153-186.
Gorelov, S. s. et al., Search Optimization in Semistructured Databases Using Hierarchy of Document Schemas, Programming and Computer Software, vol. 31, No. 6 (2005) 321-331.
Hercules, D., et al.; “Aggregation in Natural Language Generation;” Trends in Natural Language Generation, an Artificial Intelligence Perspective; pp. 88-105; dated Apr. 1993.
Herzog, G. et al., Combining Alternatives in Multimedia Presentation of Decision Support for Information for Real-Time Control, IFIP (1998) 15 pages.
Kottke, D. P. et al., Motion Estimation Via Cluster Matching, 8180 IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 16, No. 11 (Nov. 1994) 1128-1132.
Leonov, A. v. et al., Construction of an Optimal Relational Schema for Storing XML Documents in an RDBMS Without Using DTD/XML Schema, Programming and Computer Software, vol. 30, No. 6 (2004) 323-336.
Perry, B. et al., Automatic Realignment of Data Structures to Improve MPI Performance, Networks (ICN), 2010 Ninth International Conference on Year: 2010, IEEE Conference Publications (2010) pp. 42-47.
Quinlan, J. R., Induction on Decision Tress, Machine Learning, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 1, No. 1 (Jan. 1, 1986) 81-106.
Radev, D. R. et al., Generating Natural Language Summaries from Multiple On-Line Sources, Association of Computational Linguistics, vol. 24, No. 3 (1998) 469-500.
Reiter, E., An Architecture for Data-to-Text Systems, Proceedings of ENLG-2007 (Jun. 20, 2007) 97-104.
Reiter, E. et al., Building Applied Natural Language Generation Systems, Natural Language Engineering 1 (1) (1995) 31 pages.
Reiter, E., et al.; “Studies in Natural Language Processing—Building Natural Language Generation Systems;” Cambridge University Press; dated 2000.
Shaw, J.; “Clause Aggregation Using Linguistic Knowledge;” Proceedings of IWNLG; pp. 138-147; dated Jan. 1998; retrived from <http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/W98/W98-1415.pdf>.
Spillner, J. et al., Algorithms for Dispersed Processing, Utility and Cloud Computing (UC), 204 IEEE/ACM 7th International Conference on Year: 2014, IEEE Conferenced Publications (2014) pp. 914-921.
Voelz, D. et al., Rocco: A RoboCup Soccer Commentator System, German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence DFKI GmbH (1999) 11 pages.
Yu, J. et al., Choosing the Content of Textual Summaries of Large Time-Series Data Sets, Natural Language Engineering 13, (Jan. 1, 2007) pp. 1-28.
Statement in accordance with the Notice from the European patent Office dated Oct. 1, 2007 concerning business methods (OJ EPO Nov. 2007, 592-593, (XP002456414) 1 page.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/023,023 dated Mar. 4, 2014.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/023,023 dated Apr. 11, 2014.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/023,056 dated Nov. 21, 2013.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/023,056 dated Apr. 29, 2014.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,074 dated Apr. 17, 2015.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,074 dated Jun. 30, 2015.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/779,639; entitled “System and Method For Using Data to Automatically Generate A Narrative Story”.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/186,308; entitled “Method and Apparatus For Triggering the Automatic Generation of Narratives”.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/186,329; entitled “Method and Apparatus For Triggering the Automatic Generation of Narratives”.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/186,337; entitled “Method and Apparatus For Triggering the Automatic Gereration of Narratives”.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/186,346; entitled “Method and Apparatus For Triggering the Automatic Generation of Narratives”.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/464,635; entitled “Use of Tools and Abstraction in a Configurable and Portable System for Generating Narratives”.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/464,675; entitled “Configurable and Portable System For Generating Narratives”.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/464,716; entitled “Configurable and Portable System For Generating Narratives”.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/023,023; entitled “Method and Apparatus for Alert Validation;” filed Sep. 10, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/023,056; entitled “Method and Apparatus for Situational Analysis Text Generation;” filed Sep. 10, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,684; entitled “Method, Apparaus, and Computer Program Product For User-Directed Reporting;” filed Sep. 16, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,775; entitled “Method and Apparatus For Interactive Reports;” filed Sep. 16, 2013.
Kukich, K., Knowledge-Based Report Generation: A Knowledge-Engineering Approach to Natural Language Report Generation, Dissertation to The Interdisciplinary Department of Information Science, University of Pittsburg (Aug. 1983) 260 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/IB2012/056513 dated May 19, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/IB2012/056514 dated May 19, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/IB2012/057773 dated Jun. 30, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/IB2012/057774 dated Jun. 30, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/IB2013/050375 dated Jul. 21, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/IB2013/058131 dated May 5, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/IB2014/060846 dated Oct. 18, 2016.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2012/053115 dated Mar. 3, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2012/053127 dated Mar. 3, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2012/053128 dated Mar. 3, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2012/053156 dated Mar. 3, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2012/053183 dated Mar. 3, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2012/061051 dated Mar. 3, 2015.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2012/063343 dated May 5, 2015.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2014/060846 dated Feb. 4, 2015.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/053115 dated Jul. 24, 2013.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/053127 dated Jul. 24, 2013.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,806 dated Dec. 28, 2016.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,998 dated Dec. 22, 2015.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,998 dated Jan. 21, 2016.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,035 dated Mar. 30, 2016.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/421,921 dated Mar. 14, 2018.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,806 dated Jun. 10, 2016.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,998 dated Feb. 20, 2015.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,998 dated Oct. 7, 2015.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,035 dated Aug. 28, 2015.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,035 dated Dec. 10, 2015.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,035 dated Mar. 30, 2016.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated Feb. 26, 2018.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated May 10, 2017.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/188,423 dated Oct. 23, 2017.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/421,921 dated Sep. 27, 2017.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,998, entitled Method and Apparatus for Situational Analysis Text Generation; In re: Reiter; filed Jun. 23, 2014.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,035, entitled Method and Apparatus for Annotating a Graphical Output; In re: Reiter; filed Feb. 27, 2015.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/311,806; entitled Method and Apparatus for Alert Validation; In re: Reiter, filed Jun. 23, 2014.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425, filed Mar. 18, 2016; In re: Reiter, entitled Method and Apparatus for Situational Analysis Text Generation.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/188,423, filed Jun. 21, 2016; In re: Reiter, entitled Method and Apparatus for Annotating a Graphical Output.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/421,921, filed Feb. 1, 2017; In re: Reiter, entitled Method and Apparatus for Alert Validation.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated Nov. 27, 2018.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/188,423 dated Jul. 20, 2018.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/188,423 dated Oct. 30, 2018.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/009,006 dated Dec. 3, 2018.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,074, entitled Method and Apparatus For Configurable Microplanning; In re: Reiter; filed Feb. 27, 2015.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/188,423 dated Dec. 28, 2018.
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/009,006 dated Jul. 31, 2019.
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated Oct. 4, 2019.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20160132489 A1 May 2016 US
Continuations (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 14634074 Feb 2015 US
Child 14822349 US
Parent PCT/US2012/053156 Aug 2012 US
Child 14634074 US