Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!saber.UUCP!matt
From: matt@saber.UUCP (Matt Perez)
Newsgroups: mod.ai
Subject: Re: Architectures for interactive systems?
Message-ID: <8607092355.AA04571@saber.uucp>
Date: Wed, 9-Jul-86 19:55:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: saber.8607092355.AA04571
Posted: Wed Jul  9 19:55:44 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 10-Jul-86 23:12:34 EDT
References: <8607032203.AA12866@linc.cis.upenn.edu>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 59
Approved: ailist@sri-ai.arpa


> I would be interested to get any references to work on such
> integrated systems.

Sorry, I have only a vague reference (see below), but I
do have a couple of comments.

> Also, what are people's opinions on this
> subject: are practical NLP too hard to build now?

I don't think it is impossible to integrate such a system.
For example, the *Unix Consultant* at UCB is such an
integrated system, albeit for research rather than
commercial purposes.  But its application is practical
enough: to provide an on-line Unix expert which can
communicate with the user in natural language, for
input as well as in its responses.

> Should we
> leave the construction of practical systems to private enter-
> prise and restrict ourselves to the basic research problems?

Lord, NOOOOOOOOOOOO.  The integration work is just
beginning and I suspect it is a lot more complicated than
taking care of the individual subproblems.  I'd say that
"the construction of practical systems" IS a basic
research problem.  All that private enterprise can
afford to do is implement what works, and as you well
pointed out, ain't much that works so far.


As an alternative, I offer that Natural Language
by itself is not that natural a way to communicate
anyways.  In many instances a Graphical Interface is
much more appropriate.  Of course, by Natural Language I
mean written language or even speech; by Graphical
Interface I mean Graphics (generative and otherwise)
display and feedback and input devices that exploit our
kinetic abilities.  Thus I rather point at a feature in
a good display than describe the same feature verbally.
If you don't agree with me on that, try to describe a
scene to someone over the phone.

In other instances, formulae is the communications tool
of excellence.  It depends.  Ideally, I say, the user
interface should support all of the above!


Basically, however, I agree with you in the following
way:  let's first learn to build systems (and enumerate
architectures) that support (solely) a Natural Language
interface.  Ditto for graphics.  Ditto for formulae.
Then, let's see if we can take the best of each and put
them together reliably and appropriately.  And if that
ain't basic research ...

* Matt Perez *         DISCLAIMER:  beis-ball has bean bery, bery guud too me
matt@saber.uucp    sun!saber!matt@decwrl.dec.com    ...{ihnp4,sun}!saber!matt
Saber Technology Corp / 2381 Bering Drive / San Jose, CA 95131 (480) 435-8600