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 document planning.
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.
Methods, apparatuses, and computer program products are described herein that are configured to be embodied as and/or performed by a document planner in a natural language generation system. In some example embodiments, a method is provided that comprises selecting a schema based on one or more messages available in a message store and using the selected schema and the one or more messages available in the message store to generate a document plan. The schema of this embodiment may include one or more queries for selecting one or more messages from the message store, one or more messages, and/or predefined text. In some example embodiments, an optimization specification may be applied to optimize the document plan. Such optimization specification may be applied during the generation of the document plan or to a completed document plan. In some example embodiments, the optimization specification comprises rules for at least one of modifying the document plan and/or selecting a subset of the document plan. The document planner of this embodiment may then output the document plan to a microplanner or the like.
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:
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.
Natural language generation (NLG) is a field of study devoted to building technology to map data or other underlying information into natural language text. The generation of natural language texts involves subtasks such as document planning, microplanning and realization. In some example embodiments, document planning includes the process of selecting and mapping fragments of data, information or the like (e.g. messages) into data structures (e.g. document plan trees or the like), such that the data structures can be further processed into text specifications (e.g. phrase specifications, sentence plans or the like) by a microplanner so that the document plan may be expressed in natural language. In other words, a document planner, such as the document planner described herein, is configured to select information (e.g. messages) to be communicated in a text and to determine how to order and structure the selected information into sentences and paragraphs.
The task of document planning can be described as selecting a subset of messages from an input message set that fulfills the informational requirements of the user (e.g. a message store), partitioning the selected subset of messages into sentences and paragraphs, and ordering the messages for each of the partitions. An exhaustive search based method to find an appropriate document plan through all possible combinations of selection, partitioning and ordering of messages is computationally very expensive. As such, a knowledge-based approach may be appropriate for document planning. In addition, it may not be possible to identify a single unique document plan because there could be more than one document plan appropriate for a particular communicative context. Therefore document planning may further involve finding an optimum document plan among a number of alternative document plans.
In some examples, and as is described herein, a document planner may be configured using top-down planning and bottom-up narrative optimization. Top-down planning is a type of document planning, used by a document planner, which may use schemas to define the structure of the document. A schema is a template that specifies how a particular document plan should be constructed from constituent elements, where those constituent elements may be individual messages or, recursively, instantiations of other schemas. As is described herein, a schema may be expressed using a plan specification in terms of ordered messages or queries to retrieve messages. An example schema may specify a document plan which controls the global structure and global coherence of a generated text, as well as the conditions under which the schema is applicable.
Bottom-up narrative optimization achieves required variations of a document plan when variations of a schema are possible, such as when the global structure and/or ordering of messages is underspecified in a schema. Bottom-up narrative optimization may provide functions such as locally ordering multiple returned messages, globally reordering messages to achieve variation, and/or inserting or deleting subtrees of additional messages into a document plan tree. As is described herein, bottom-up narrative optimization may be configured to use an optimization specification that operates on a document plan or a set of messages. The optimization specification may be configured to control, in some examples, discourse features such as local coherence, continuity, text size, text fluency, discourse-focus maintenance and narration development. In some example embodiments, top-down planning may be combined with bottom-up narrative optimization to generate a document plan that may be input to, or otherwise be accessed by, a microplanner in a natural language generation system. In some embodiments, bottom-up narrative optimization may be used during generation of a document plan by top-down planning and/or bottom-up narrative optimization may be used to modify a document plan once top-down planning is complete.
A message store 110 is configured to store one or more messages that are accessible by the natural language generation system 102. 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 news 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 102 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 or an indication that a message is a focus of discourse.
In some example embodiments, a natural language generation system, such as natural language generation system 102, is configured to generate phrases, sentences, text or the like which may take the form of natural language text. The natural language generation system 102 comprises, in some example embodiments, a document planner 130, a microplanner 132 and/or a realizer 134. The natural language generation system 102 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 114 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. For example, an intravenous feed message may be described prior to a milk feed message in output text describing the status of a baby's feeding. In other examples, an administration method message may be described after, but in relation to, a fluid details message. See, for example, the document plan tree 302 in
The output of the document planner 130 may be a tree-structured object or other data structure that is referred to in some embodiments as a document plan tree. In an instance in which a tree-structured object is chosen for the document plan, the leaf nodes of the document plan tree may contain the messages or pre-defined text to be presented in a document, and the intermediate nodes of the tree-structured 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. In some embodiments, nodes of the document plan tree may also contain parameters for use with a microplanner, such as microplanner 132.
The microplanner 132 is configured to construct a text specification based on the document plan output 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. In some examples, aggregation includes, but is not limited to, determining whether two or more messages can be combined together linguistically to produce a more complex sentence. For example, one or more events may be aggregated so that both of the events are described by a single sentence.
In some examples, lexicalization includes, but is not limited to, choosing particular words for the expression of concepts and relations. For example, the phrase “along with” may be used to describe coinciding conditions or “administered” may be used to describe the causal event.
In some examples, referring expression generation includes, but is not limited to, choosing how to refer to an entity so that it can be unambiguously identified by the reader. For example, in a first sentence “John Smith” and “a heart rate alarm” may be used where “he” and “it” may be used in subsequent sentences.
The output of the microplanner 132, in some example embodiments, is a tree-structured text specification whose leaf nodes are phrase specifications, and whose internal nodes express rhetorical relations between the leaf nodes. A phrase specification may correspond to a sentence or a sub-sentence fragment (e.g. a title) and are produced from one or more messages. A phrase specification is configured to contain one or more syntactic constituents (e.g. subject, verb, prepositional phrase and/or the like) and one or more syntactic features (e.g. tense).
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.
A schema may be defined using a plan specification language that is configured to define one or more messages and/or one or more queries for messages to be included in the document plan and the order in which the messages are to be presented in the output document plan. For example, a schema may specify compulsory or optional queries that may be used to extract messages from message store 110 for instantiating the schema. A schema may additionally or alternatively specify one or more messages or predefined phrases for instantiating the schema. The one or more schemas may be stored in or accessible via a schema store 202.
The schema may be configured to represent the structure of the document plan, such as via Extensible Markup Language (XML). Advantageously, by defining a schema, such as by using XML as the specification language, a user may define the structure of a document plan and insert a particular message or set of messages in a particular location in the document, where the messages may be retrieved based on queries specified in the schema or the messages may be directly specified in the schema. For example, top-down schema may be represented using a specification such as below, and further illustrated in
As is shown in the example schema, multiple sections, and messages that make up sections, may be defined. In some examples and as shown above, the IV Feed message 304 of
This example schema specifies queries for an IV Feed message and a Milk feed message. The example schema further specifies that an IV Feed message should be followed by a milk feed message. In the message store, both the IV feed and the Milk feed messages may refer or link to other messages in the message store, such as a Fluid Details message (the details of the fluid given to the baby) and an Administration Method message (how the feed was actually administered). Because the messages are linked in the message store, there is no need to explicitly specify these messages in the schema. As the example schema contains queries that return only single messages, a top-down planning approach alone may be appropriate. If the queries of a schema return multiple messages, or if an order for multiple messages is not specified in the schema, generating the document plan may require the combination of top-down planning and bottom-up optimizations as described herein.
Alternatively or additionally, a schema may invoke sub-schemas. For example, a schema may invoke another schema for the purposes of building a particular paragraph or other section of the document plan
In some example embodiments, the document planner 130 may include a top-down document planner 212 that provides functionality to generate document plans by instantiating one or more schemas selected from the schema store 202 and one or more messages selected from the message store 110. The schema may be expressed using a planning specification. As described above, the schema may contain queries for the selection of the one or more messages from the message store 110 based on at least one of user defined features; features possessed by the messages; features that describe the communicative context of the messages; or previously selected messages. Once the selected schema is instantiated by the top-down document planner 212, the top-down document planner 212 may output one or more document plans that represent the messages and/or pre-defined text to the bottom-up plan optimizer 214. The top-down document planner 212 is further described with respect to
In some example embodiments, the document planner 130 may include a bottom-up plan optimizer 214 that is configured to apply an optimization specification during generation of the document plan or against the complete document plan output by the top-down document planner 212 to provide an optimized document plan for output, such as to microplanner 132. The bottom-up plan optimizer 214 is further described with respect to
An optimization specification may be made up of functions that perform tasks such as locally ordering multiple returned messages, globally ordering messages, or inserting and/or deleting subtrees of additional messages, for example. Such planning functions may run in a fixed sequence or may be called from the top-down document planner as necessary.
An optimization specification may contain and execute rules comprised of triggering conditions and actions to be taken to generate a second set of one or more optimal document plans for output. For example, such rules may be of the form “if <condition> then <action1> else <action2>”. In some embodiments, the rules may reference externally specified parameters, for example, message properties such as the start-time of an event used for ordering messages in the document plan. In some embodiments, the rules may also call support functions, such as an “importance(message)” function to compute the importance of a given message.
In some example embodiments, the optimization specification may comprise rules for document and/or text size, text fluency, repetition avoidance, determination of paragraph breaks, message ordering, ensuring narrative coherence, maintaining discourse focus, narration development, and/or the like. The optimization specification may also specify sequencing patterns for messages and aggregation of messages.
In some embodiments, rules may be domain specific, such as are acquired from a corpus or domain expert, which may be represented as follow-on rules. A follow-on rule associates a follow-on score with a pair of messages ordered in a specific sequence. A follow-on score might be estimated by analyzing a corpus to determine the proportion of times a pair of messages appears in a specific order in the corpus. Alternatively domain experts could specify follow-on scores. For example, a follow-on rule may include “if lead_Message is A RAIN_EVENT and the follow_on_Message is A SKY_STATE_EVENT then follow_on_Score=1.0”. This means that a RAIN_EVENT should always be (because the follow-on score is 1) ordered before a SKY_STATE_EVENT in the document plan. In some embodiments, rules may be domain independent, such as where messages in all domains have an “importance” property and rules may specify ordering, reordering, or inserting of messages based on the importance value. For example, a domain independent rule may include “if importance(incoming_Message)>highestImportance(currentDocPlan) then addToFront(incoming_Message, currentDocPlan)”.
In some example embodiments, the bottom-up plan optimizer 214 may retrieve optimization specifications from an optimization specification store 204 to apply against a document plan generated by the top-down document planner 212. In some example embodiments, an optimization specification may include rules comprising triggering conditions and actions to be taken to modify document plans.
Alternatively or additionally, the optimization specification may be configured to specify acceptable sequencing patterns of messages returned from the message store or specify the aggregation of the selected messages.
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
The natural language generation system 102 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
In other embodiments, some portion of the contents, some or all of the components of the natural language generation system 102 may be stored on and/or transmitted over the other computer-readable media 405. The components of the natural language generation system 102 preferably execute on one or more processors 403 and are configured to enable operation of an example document planner, 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
The natural language generation system 102 is further configured to provide functions such as those described with reference to
In an example embodiment, components/modules of the natural language generation system 102 are implemented using standard programming techniques. For example, the natural language generation system 102 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 102 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., Perl, 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 102, 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 102 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.
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. 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.
At block 506, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the top-down document planner 212, the processor 403, or the like, for beginning operations for generating a document plan. For example, the document planner 130 may begin generation of a document plan using the selected schema and one or more messages from the message store. In some example embodiments, the selected schema may call a sub-schema that is also to be used in generating the first set of document plans. In some embodiments, a schema may also specify pre-defined messages or phrases that may be used in generating a document plan.
At block 508, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the top-down document planner 212, the processor 403, or the like, for selecting one or more messages from the message store based on the schema. The schema may specify queries to be executed against the message store to retrieve message content for use in generating a document plan. In some example embodiments, a schema may further specify alternate queries that may be run against the message store if the initial queries do not return a result including one or more messages. The schema may also specify predefined messages or text for use in generating the document plan.
At block 510, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the top-down document planner 212, the processor 403, or the like, for determining if optimizations is needed based on the messages retrieved from a message store, such as message store 110. For example, if a query returns more than one message, or if the schema does not specify the ordering for multiple messages, the document planner 130 may determine that optimization is needed to generate the desired document plan. If optimization of the returned messages is needed, for example, multiple messages are returned which need to be locally ordered, operation continues to block 512 (510-YES). If optimization of the returned messages is not needed, operation continues to block 516 (510-NO).
At block 512, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the bottom-up plan optimizer 214, the processor 403, or the like, for retrieving an optimization specification, such as from optimization specification store 204, for use in optimizing the retrieved messages to be added to a document plan. An optimization specification may contain rules comprised of triggering conditions and actions to be taken to determine how messages may be added to a document plan during generation of the document plan. For example, the optimization specification may provide rules for locally ordering messages for a section of the document plan.
At block 514, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the bottom-up plan optimizer 214, the processor 403, or the like, for applying the optimization specification rules against the retrieved messages to determine optimal placement of the messages.
At block 516, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the bottom-up plan optimizer 214, the top-down document planner 212, the processor 403, or the like, for adding the messages to the document plan. The document planner 130 may add the retrieved messages to the document plan based on the schema or based on the rules of an optimization specification.
At block 518, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the bottom-up plan optimizer 214, the top-down document planner 212, the processor 403, or the like, for determining whether the generation of a document plan is complete. For example, in some embodiments, the document planner 130 may determine that the schema has been completely instantiated or that all the relevant messages from a message store have been placed in the document plan. If it is determined that the document plan is not complete, for example, there are additional queries specified in the schema, operation returns to block 508 (518-NO). If it is determined that the document plan is complete, operation may continue to block 520 (518-YES).
At block 520, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the bottom-up plan optimizer 214, the processor 403, or the like, for retrieving an optimization specification, such as from optimization specification store 204, for use in optimizing the completed document plan. An optimization specification may contain rules comprised of triggering conditions and actions to be taken to modify the completed document plan to provide an optimal document plan for output, such as to a microplanner. In some example embodiments, the optimization specification may comprise rules for document and/or text size, text fluency, repetition avoidance, determination of paragraph breaks, message ordering, ensuring narrative coherence, maintaining discourse focus, narration development, and/or the like. The optimization specification may also specify sequencing patterns for messages and aggregation of messages.
At block 522, the document planner 130 may include means, such as the bottom-up plan optimizer 214, the processor 403, or the like, for applying the optimization specification rules against the completed document plan to generate an optimal document plan. The optimal document plan may then be provided as input to the microplanner.
In an example embodiment, a sample schema for top-down document planning to generate a weather and temperature text may be represented as:
Such a schema orders the temperature information after other weather information, capturing the global order of the text, but fails to specify how to order the multiple weather messages. In such situations, the schema may underspecify the global structure and ordering of messages for a text.
In some embodiments the document planner 130 may first call the top-down document planner 212 to select a schema to construct a document plan. When certain conditions are fulfilled, the document planner 130 may then call the bottom-up plan optimizer 214 to provide document plan optimization, such as calling optimization functions such as orderMessages( ) or applyDomainRules( ) to locally order multiple messages returned by a query.
To generate the document plan illustrated in
The top-down document planner 212 may select the Weather+Temperature schema to generate the document plan. As shown in
Because the query returned multiple messages and because there may be an opportunity to further optimize the ordering of these messages, the document planner 130 may call the bottom-up plan optimizer 214 to optimize the document plan being generated. The bottom-up plan optimizer 214 may call an orderMessages( ) function and create a docPlan node to be set as the root of the subtree to be created with the messages returned from the query, as illustrated in
The createTemporalStructure( ) function may receive the temporally ordered list of six messages and the subtree root docPlan node. The createTemporalStructure( ) function creates a docPlan node with the first (temporally ordered) message (#1 Frost_Event) and adds it to the subtree root docPlan node as a child, as illustrated in
The bottom-up plan optimizer 214 then adds the subtree received from OrderMessages( ) to the main document plan by merging the subtree root docPlan node with the paragraph docPlan node, as illustrated in
The top-down document planner 212 then executes Message-single-query for TEMPERATURE_EVENT which returns messages #7 and #8 from the message store, with the schema specifying how to order these messages. Because the query returned multiple messages, the bottom-up optimizer might be called to further optimize the sub-plan. In this example case, the bottom-up optimizer would not find any further optimizations, The top-down document planner 212 creates docPlan nodes for each of messages #7 and #8 and adds them as children to the paragraph docPlan node, as illustrated in
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.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/IB2013/050375 | 1/15/2013 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2014/111753 | 7/24/2014 | WO | A |
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 |
6629340 | Dale et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6665640 | Bennett et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6717513 | Sandelman et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6947885 | Bangalore et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6958746 | Anderson et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
7043420 | Ratnaparkhi | May 2006 | B2 |
7062483 | Ferrari et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7111018 | Goodrich et al. | 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 |
7493253 | Ceusters | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7493311 | Cutsinger | Feb 2009 | B1 |
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 |
7657424 | Bennett | Feb 2010 | B2 |
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 |
7966369 | Briere et al. | Jun 2011 | B1 |
7970601 | Burmester et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7979267 | Ruiz et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8015006 | Kennewick et al. | Sep 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 |
8117261 | Briere et al. | Feb 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 |
8204751 | Di Fabbrizio et al. | Jun 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 |
8457950 | Gardner | Jun 2013 | B1 |
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 |
8572173 | Briere 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 |
8660545 | Redford et al. | Feb 2014 | B1 |
8676691 | Schiller | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8688434 | Birnbaum et al. | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8689176 | Bagheri et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8700396 | Mengibar et al. | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8711732 | Johnson | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8719696 | Duncan | May 2014 | B2 |
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 |
8935769 | Hessler | 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 |
9173005 | Redford et al. | 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 |
9396181 | Sripada et al. | Jul 2016 | B1 |
9405448 | Reiter | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9640045 | Reiter | May 2017 | B2 |
9904676 | Sripada et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
10026274 | Reiter | Jul 2018 | B2 |
20020026306 | Bangalore et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020143742 | Nonomura | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147711 | Hattori | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030131315 | Escher | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030182102 | Corston-Oliver et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030195740 | Tokuda et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212545 | Kallulli | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030233230 | Ammicht et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040002958 | Seshadri | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040044515 | Metcalf et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040093344 | Berger | May 2004 | A1 |
20040246120 | Benner et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040268237 | Jones | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050039107 | Hander et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050108001 | Aarskog | May 2005 | A1 |
20050228635 | Araki et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050256703 | Markel | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060004725 | Abraido-Fandino | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060004844 | Rothschiller | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060020886 | Agrawal et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060020916 | Allison et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060085414 | Chai et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060085667 | Kubota et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060136196 | Brun et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060178868 | Billerey-Mosier | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184888 | Bala | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060224638 | Wald et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060242563 | Liu | 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 et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070150806 | Hartmann | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070156677 | Szabo | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070169021 | Huynh et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070219773 | Roux et al. | 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 |
20090076799 | Crouch et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090089100 | Nenov et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090089126 | Odubiyi | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090111486 | Burstrom | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090138258 | Neale | May 2009 | A1 |
20090144609 | Liang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090156229 | Hein et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090177929 | Sijelmassi | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182549 | Anisimovich et al. | 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 et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100146491 | Hirano et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100153095 | Yang et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100153105 | Di Fabbrizio 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 |
20100241421 | Funakoshi | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100325608 | Radigan | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100332235 | David | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110010164 | Williams | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110035210 | Rosenfeld et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110055687 | Bhandar | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110068929 | Franz et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110087486 | Schiller | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110160986 | Wu et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110179006 | Cox et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110184959 | Maxwell, III et al. | 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 |
20110314060 | Sinha et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120078888 | Brown et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120084027 | Caine | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120131008 | Ahn et al. | May 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 et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120232919 | Wilson et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120290289 | Manera et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120290310 | Watson | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120310990 | Viegas | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130013290 | Funakoshi et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130030810 | Kopparapu et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130041921 | Cooper et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130066873 | Salvetti | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130095864 | Marovets | Apr 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 |
20130205195 | Dekhil | Aug 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 |
20140328570 | Cheng et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140358964 | Woods et al. | Dec 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 |
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 |
20160132489 | Reiter | May 2016 | A1 |
20160140090 | Dale et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160232152 | Mahamood | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160328381 | Reiter | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160328385 | Reiter | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170018107 | Reiter | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170075884 | Sripada et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20190035232 | Reiter | Jan 2019 | A1 |
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 AI | 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 2015164253 | Oct 2015 | WO |
WO 2015175338 | Nov 2015 | WO |
WO 2016004266 | Jan 2016 | WO |
Entry |
---|
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. |
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. 15/074,425, filed Mar. 18, 2016; In re: Reiter, entitled Method and Apparatus for Situational Analysis Text Generation. |
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/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/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/US2012/053115 dated Jul. 24, 2013. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/053127 dated Jul. 24, 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/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 Presentations, Integration of Sensory Information 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 with Space and Movement, Report 63, German Research Center for Articial Intelligence (DFKI) SFB 314, Project VITRA, (Nov. 1989) 1-21. |
Barzilay, R., et al., “Aggregation via Set Partitioning for Natural Language Generation;” Proceedings 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-Marker 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. |
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 the Multimedia Presentation of Decision Support Information for Real-Time ControlIFIP (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. |
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 of Decision Trees, 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. |
Shaw, J.; “Clause Aggregation Using Linguistic Knowledge;” Proceedings of IWNLG; pp. 138-147; dated Jan. 1998; retrieved from <http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/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. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/779,636; 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. 13/186,337; entitled “Method and Apparatus for Triggering the Automatic Generation 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, filed Sep. 16, 2013; In re: Sripad et al., entitled Method, Apparatus and Computer Program Product for User-Directed Reporting. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,775; entitled “Method and Apparatus for Interactive Reports”, filed Sep. 16, 2013. |
Gorelov, S. S. et al.., Search Optimization in Semistructured Databases Using Hierarchy of Document Schemas, Programming and Computer Software, vol. 31, No. 6 (Nov. 1, 2005) pp. 321-331. |
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 (Nov. 1, 2004) pp. 323-336. |
Reiter, E. et al., Building Natural Language Generation Systems, Cambridge University Press (2000), 138 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2013/050375 dated May 7, 2013. |
Chang-Jie, M. et al., Interactive Location-based Services Combined with Natural Language, International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing (2007) 3015-3018. |
Guoqiang, D. et al., The Research on Interactive short Message Response, Workshop on Intelligent Information Technology Application, IEEE Conference Publications (2007) 206-209. |
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/IB2013/058131 dated Jul. 3, 2014. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/IB2014/060846 dated Feb. 4, 2015. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,684 dated Mar. 21, 2016. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,775 dated Aug. 12, 2015. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,775 dated Sep. 10, 2015. |
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. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,684 dated Oct. 6, 2015. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/027,775 dated Jul. 13, 2015. |
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. 15/022,420 dated May 18, 2017. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/760,848 dated May 11, 2017. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated May 10, 2017. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/186,927 dated May 1, 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. |
Premchaiswadi, W. et al., Enhancing Learning Systems by using Virtual Interactive Classrooms and Web-based Collaborative Work, Education Engineering (EDUCON) IEEE Conference Publications, (2010) 1531-1537. |
Reiter, E., Chapter 4: Document Planning (early draft) Building Natural Language Generation Systems (2005) 73-113 [Retrieved from the Internet Nov. 2, 2017: <http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/˜gwilcock/Tartu-2003/ReiterDale/4-DocumentPlanning.pdf>]. |
Seki, Y., XML Transformation-based three-stage pipelined Natural Language Generation System, Proc. of 6th NLP Pacific Rim Symposium (NLPRS 2001) (2001) 767-768 [Retrieved from the Internet Nov. 2, 2017: <http://www.afnlp.org/archives/nlprs2001/pdf/exh-04-01.pdf>]. |
Takeuchi, Y. et al., Human Prosocial Response to Emotive Facial Expression of Interactive Agent, The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (2006), 680-685. |
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. 14/760,848, entitled Method and Apparatus for Document Planning; In re: Sripada; filed Jul. 14, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/961,222, entitled Method and Apparatus for Interactive Reports; In re: Dale et al., filed Dec. 7, 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. 15/186,927, filed Jun. 20, 2016; In re: Sripada, entitled Method, Apparatus, and Computer Program Product for User-Directed Reporting. |
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. |
Wilcox, G., An Overview of Shallow XML-Based Natural Language Generation, Baltic HLT (2005) 67-78 [Retrieved from the Internet Nov. 2, 2017: <https://www.ling.helsinki.fi/˜gwilcock/Pubs/2005/BalticHLT-05.pdf>]. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/421,921 dated Mar. 14, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/022,420 dated Feb. 13, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated Feb. 26, 2018. |
Krahmer et al., “Computational Generation of Referring Expressions: A Survey,” In Computational Linguistics, 38:173-218, (2012). |
Paraboni, “Generating Referring Expressions: Making Referents Easy to Identify,” In Computational Linguistics, 33(2):229-254, (2007). |
Paraboni, “Generating references in hierarchical domains: the case of Document Deixis,” University of Brighton PhD thesis, pp. 1-207, (2003). |
Siddharthan et al., “Generating referrng expressions in open domains,” In Proceedings of ACL 2004, pp. 1-8, (2004). |
Applicant Initiated Interview Summary for U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349 dated Feb. 13, 2018. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,074 dated Jun. 30, 2015. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,119 dated Feb. 2, 2016. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,074 dated Apr. 17, 2015. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,119 dated Apr. 21, 2015. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,119 dated Oct. 23, 2015. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349 dated Jan. 20, 2017. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349 dated Jun. 27, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349 dated Nov. 13, 2017. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349 dated Sep. 2, 2016. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/961,222 dated Mar. 3, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/093,337 dated Apr. 4, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/093,337 dated Jun. 29, 2017. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/186,927 dated Jul. 3, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/186,927 dated Nov. 17, 2017. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/188,423 dated Jul. 20, 2018. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,074, entitled Method and Apparatus for Configurable Microplanning; In re: Reiter; filed Feb. 27, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349; entitled Method and Apparatus for Configurable Microplanning; In re: Reiter, filed Aug. 10, 2015. |
Buschmeier et al, “An alignment-capable microplanner for natural language generation,” Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 82-89, (2009). |
Theune, “Natural Language Generation for dialogue: sysem survey,” Thesis , University of Twene, pp. 1-47, (2003). |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/961,222 dated Nov. 16, 2018. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/186,927 dated Dec. 20, 2018. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/188,423 dated Dec. 28, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated Nov. 27, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/093,337 dated Dec. 14, 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. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/022,420 dated Sep. 28, 2018. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/009,006 dated Jul. 31, 2019. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349 dated Dec. 26, 2018. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/822,349 dated Mar. 22, 2019. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/022,420 dated Apr. 22, 2019. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/022,420 dated Jan. 17, 2020. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated Oct. 4, 2019. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/074,425 dated May 8, 2020. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/367,095 dated May 28, 2020. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150363364 A1 | Dec 2015 | US |