<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C88-2119">
  <Title>A New Strategy for Providing Definitions In Task-Oriented Dialogues</Title>
  <Section position="2" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1 Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> In the course of ongoing task-oriented expert-consultation dialogues, many occasions arise in which the expert must provide a definition. In this paper we will present a new strategy for a computer expert to use in giving definitions in a way that is most helpful to the individual user.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The strategy relies on a dynamically inferred model of the user's dom~dn knowledge, task-related plans and goals, and receptivity to different kinds of information. It constructs a definition by weighting both the strategic predicates that might comprise a definition and the propositions that might be used to fill the strategic predicates. These weights are used to order what migh t be said according to its anticipated usefulness to the user. Rules can then be used to produce an utterance that incorporates the most important informatlo~t while adhering to common rhetorical practices. This strategy rellects our overall hypothesis that beliefs about the appropriate content of a definition should guide selection of a rhetorical strategy, instead of the choice of a rhetorical strategy determining content.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> Section 2 describes situations in task-oriented dialogues in which definitions are called for. Section 3 identifies three characteristics that differentiate definitions provided by experts during task-oriented dialogues from those provided in response to isolated requests for definitions, and argues that the choice of a rhetorical strategy should be made on the basis of being able to include in the definition those features deemed most important. Section 4 proposes a Principle of Usefulness as a guideline for selecting information to include in definitions. Section 5 discusses strategic predicates. Section 6 presents an overview of our strategy for weighting predicates and propositions and then ranking what might be said according to its usefulness to the user.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>