Corpora: ACL-2001 Workshop on Evaluation for Language & Dialogue Systems CFP

From: Priscilla Rasmussen (rasmusse@cs.rutgers.edu)
Date: Fri Mar 02 2001 - 16:57:00 MET

  • Next message: Vera Fluhr: "Corpora: Reminder: DIALOGUE'2001 CFP"

    Call for Papers

    Workshop on Evaluation for Language and Dialogue Systems
    ACL/EACL 2001
    Toulouse, France
    July 6-7, 2001

    WORKSHOP GOALS

    The aim of this two day workshop is to identify and to synthesize current
    needs for language-technology evaluation.

    The first day of the workshop will focus on one of the most challenging
    current issues in language engineering: the evaluation of dialogue systems
    and models. The second day will extend the discussion to address the problem
    of evaluation in language engineering more broadly and on more theoretical
    grounds.

    The space of possible dialogues is enormous, even for limited domains like
    travel information servers. The generalization of evaluation methodologies
    across different application domains and languages is an open problem.
    Review of published evaluations of dialogue models and systems suggests that
    usability techniques are the standard method. Dialogue-based system are
    often evaluated in terms of standard, objective usability metrics, such as
    task-completion time and number of user actions. In the past, researchers
    have proposed and debated theory-based methods for modifying and testing the
    underlying dialogue model, but the most widely used method of evaluation is
    usability testing, although more precise and empirical methods for
    evaluating the effectiveness of dialogue models have been proposed. For
    task-based interaction, typical measures of effectiveness are
    time-to-completion and task outcome, but the evaluation should focus on user
    satisfaction rather than on arbitrary effectiveness measurements.Indeed, the
    problems faced in current approaches to measurement of effectiveness
    dialogue models and systems include:

    Direct measures are unhelpful because efficient performance on the nominal
    task may not represent the most effective interaction
    Indirect measures usually rely on judgment and are vulnerable to weak
    relationships between the inputs and outputs
    Subjective measures are unreliable and domain-specific
    For its first day, the workshop organizers solicit papers on these issues,
    with particular emphasis on methods that go beyond usability testing to
    address the underlying dialogue model. Representative questions to be
    addressed include:

      o How do we deal with the combinatorial explosion
        of dialogue states?
      o How can satisfaction be measured with respect to
        underlying dialogue models?
      o Are there useful direct measures of dialogue properties
        that do not depend on task efficiency?
      o What is the role of agent-based simulation in
        evaluation of dialogue models?

    Of course, the problems faced in evaluating dialogue and system models are
    found in other domains of language engineering, even for non-interactive
    processes such as part-of-speech tagging, parsing, semantic disambiguation,
    information extration, speech transcription, and audio document indexing. So
    the issue of evaluation can be viewed at a more generic level, raising
    fundamental, theoretical questions such as:

      o What are the interest and benefits of evaluation
        for language engineering?
      o Do we really need these specific methodologies,
        since a form of evaluation sould always be present
        in any scientific investigation?
      o If evaluation is needed in language engineering, is
        it the case for all domains?
      o What form should it take? Technology evaluation
        (task-oriented in laboratory environment) or
        field/user Evaluation (complete systems in real-life
        conditions)?

    We have seen before that the the evaluation of dialogue models is still
    unsolved, but for domains where metrics already exists, are they
    satisfactory and sufficient? How can we take into account or abstract from
    the subjective factor introduced by human operators in the process?
    Do similarity measures and standards offer appropriate answers to this
    problem? Most of the efforts focus on evaluating process, but what about the
    issue of language resources evaluation?

    For its second day of work, the workshop organizers solicit papers on these
    issues, with the intent to address the problem of evaluation both from a
    broader perspective (including novel applications domains for evaluation,
    new metrics for known tasks and resource evaluation) and a more theoretical
    point of view (including formal theory of evaluation and infrastructural
    needs of language engineering).

    NOTE: People who would like to submit a paper on lexical semantic
    disambiguation evaluation should consider the parallel workshop, on July
    5-6, for the closure of the SENSEVAL-2 evaluation campaign.

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    WORKSHOP ORGANIZATION

    The organization of each of the two days of the workshop will reflect the
    workshop's two main themes. Each day will begin with a session of
    presentations of selected papers and follow with panel discussions to
    synthesize and develop possible methodologies from additional selected
    workshop papers.

    WORKSHOP PARTICIPATION

    The workshop seeks participation from people involved or interested in the
    problem of evaluation in language processing and the research and industrial
    communities that study and implement dialogue models for natural-language
    interaction systems.

    The first part of the workshop will specifically draw on the
    natural-language interaction community, for instance like the one developing
    at the confluence of SIGdial and SIGCHI, which will find in this workshop an
    atmosphere more flavored by computational-linguistics related issues (see,
    for example, the First SIGdialWorkshop on Discourse and Dialogue).

    The second part of the workshop is intended to provide a forum for a broader
    audience more in the spirit of the one that attended the LREC'2000 Satellite
    Workshop on Evaluation (see http://www.limsi.fr/TLP/CLASS), in particular
    offering an opportunity to people involved in language engineering
    evaluation (e.g ., the CLASS audience) in the context of national or
    transnational projects or programs, both in Europe and abroad.

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    SUBMISSION DETAILS

    Paper submissions should follow the two-column format of ACL proceedings and
    should not exceed eight (8) pages, including references. We strongly
    recommend the use of ACL LaTeX style files or Microsoft Word Style files
    tailored for this year's conference. They are available from the ACL-2001
    program committee Web site at http://acl2001.dfki.de/style/.

    Papers should be submitted electronically, as either a LaTeX, Word or PDF
    file to either:

    Patrick Paroubek, pap@limsi.fr
    Karen Ward, kward@cs.utep.edu

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    TIMETABLE OF IMPORTANT DATES

    Deadline for workshop paper submissions: April 6, 2001
    Deadline for notification of workshop paper acceptance: April 27, 2001
    Deadline for camera-ready workshop papers: May 16, 2001
    Workshop date: July 6-7, 2001

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    WORKSHOP ORGANIZING COMMITTEE

    David G. Novick, UTEP
    novick@cs.utep.edu
    http://www.cs.utep.edu/novick

    Joseph Mariani, Limsi - CNRS
    mariani@limsi.fr
    http://www.limsi.fr/Individu/mariani

    Candy Kamm, AT&T Labs
    cak@research.att.com
    http://www.research.att.com/info/cak

    Patrick Paroubek, Limsi - CNRS
    pap@limsi.fr
    http://www.limsi.fr/Individu/pap

    Nils Dahlbäck, Linköping University
    nilda@ida.liu.se
    http://www.ida.liu.se/~nilda/

    Frankie James, NASA Ames Research Center
    fjames@riacs.edu
    http://www-pcd.stanford.edu/frankie/

    Karen Ward, UTEP, kward@cs.utep.edu
    http://www.cs.utep.edu/kward

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE

    David G. Novick
    Joseph Mariani
    Candy Kamm
    Patrick Paroubek
    Nils Dahlbäck
    Frankie James
    Karen Ward
    Christian Jacquemin
    Niels Ole Bernsen
    Stephane Chaudiron
    Khalid Choukri
    Martin Rajman
    Robert Gaizauskas
    Donna Harman
    Lynette Hirschman (tentative)
    David Pallett (tentative)
    Carol Peters (tentative)
    Jose Pardo (tentative)
    Herman Steeneken (tentative)
    Oliviero Stock (tentative)
    Saïd Tazi
    Hans Uszkoreit (tentative)

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    SPONSORS

     ACL 2001
     CLASS
     ELRA
     ELSNET

    We also anticipate co-sponsorship from SIGdial.

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

    Additional information on the workshop, including accepted papers and the
    workshop schedule, will be made available as needed at
    http://www.limsi.fr/TLP/CLASS/eacl01.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 02 2001 - 22:40:32 MET