Dialog Assistant Clarifying Ambiguous Natural Language Input

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Human-machine dialog systems face challenges in clarifying ambiguous and out-of-vocabulary natural language inputs, leading to reduced clarity and effectiveness in human-machine interactions, particularly with spontaneous and unedited communications.

Innovation Solution

A dialog assistant is implemented to identify clarification targets within human-generated conversational natural language inputs, determine the type of clarification needed, and present targeted clarification questions to users, processing responses to refine the input and improve understanding.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If simple error correction mechanisms are used to detect errors in machine-readable input, then error detection capability is improved, but the system can only address specific obvious errors and responds with non-specific requests to rephrase, reducing clarification effectiveness

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror detection capabilityVSAvoidclarification effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the error correction process into distinct phases: error detection, error classification into specific types (typos, homophones, out-of-vocabulary words, ambiguous references), and targeted clarification questioning. This segmentation allows the system to move beyond generic error detection to specific error type identification and resolution.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter of clarification from generic rephrase requests to specific targeted questions based on error type. For example, when a homophone error is detected, the system presents multiple possible interpretations and asks the user to select the correct one, rather than simply requesting a rephrase.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Measurement precision

If automatic error detection algorithms are implemented to identify error segments in machine-readable input, then error identification accuracy is improved, but the system lacks the ability to provide targeted clarification, reducing overall system performance

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror identification accuracyVSAvoidsystem performance
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback loops where error detection results trigger specific clarification questions, user responses are analyzed to determine the actual error type, and corrections are applied iteratively. This feedback mechanism enables the system to refine its understanding and improve performance through multiple interaction rounds.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary error classification and generates appropriate clarification questions before user response. By preparing targeted questions in advance based on detected error patterns, the system reduces interaction time and improves overall processing efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Reliability

If the system requests users to rephrase input when errors are detected, then error correction is attempted, but the non-specific nature of rephrase requests reduces user convenience and increases interaction time

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror correctionVSAvoidinteraction time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies local quality by providing different types of clarification assistance for different error types. For homophones, it provides multiple word choices; for out-of-vocabulary words, it provides spelling guidance; for ambiguous references, it provides context-specific questions. This localized approach reduces user cognitive load and interaction time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

4Device complexity

If the system only addresses specific obvious error types with rephrase requests, then implementation complexity is reduced, but clarification effectiveness and user experience deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem complexityVSAvoiduser experience
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements a universal clarification framework that handles multiple error types (typos, homophones, out-of-vocabulary words, ambiguous references) through a unified architecture. The same basic process flow and user interface are used across different error types, with the specific clarification strategy adapting automatically based on the detected error category.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS9805718B2Clarifying natural language input using targeted questions
Publication Date: 2017.10.31 SRI INTERNATIONAL
  • US9805718B2 patent drawing
  • US9805718B2 patent drawing
  • US9805718B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A dialog assistant embodied in a computing system can present a clarification question based on a machine-readable version of human-generated conversational natural language input. Some versions of the dialog assistant identify a clarification target in the machine-readable version, determine a clarification type relating to the clarification target, present the clarification question in a conversational natural language manner, and process a human-generated conversational natural language response to the clarification question.