Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
An Introduction to Companion-Technology Read chapter Read first chapter

2017 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

7. To Plan for the User Is to Plan with the User: Integrating User Interaction into the Planning Process

Authors : Gregor Behnke, Florian Nielsen, Marvin Schiller, Denis Ponomaryov, Pascal Bercher, Birte Glimm, Wolfgang Minker, Susanne Biundo

Published in: Companion Technology

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Settings where systems and users work together to solve problems collaboratively are among the most challenging applications of Companion-Technology. So far we have seen how planning technology can be exploited to realize Companion-Systems that adapt flexibly to changes in the user’s situation and environment and provide detailed help for users to realize their goals. However, such systems lack the capability to generate their plans in cooperation with the user. In this chapter we go one step further and describe how to involve the user directly into the planning process. This enables users to integrate their wishes and preferences into plans and helps the system to produce individual plans, which in turn let the Companion-System gain acceptance and trust from the user.
Such a Companion-System must be able to manage diverse interactions with a human user. A so-called mixed-initiative planning system integrates several Companion-Technologies which are described in this chapter. For example, a—not yet final—plan, including its flaws and solutions, must be presented to the user to provide a basis for her or his decision. We describe how a dialog manager can be constructed such that it can handle all communication with a user. Naturally, the dialog manager and the planner must use coherent models. We show how an ontology can be exploited to achieve such models. Finally, we show how the causal information included in plans can be used to answer the questions a user might have about a plan.
The given capabilities of a system to integrate user decisions and to explain its own decisions to the user in an appropriate way are essential for systems that interact with human users.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Addressing Uncertainty in Hierarchical User-Centered Planning
next chapter Neurobiological Fundamentals of Strategy Change: A Core Competence of Companion-Systems
Footnotes
1
Computing a perfect heuristic is as difficult as planning itself, e.g. in the case of HTN planning, undecidable [14].
 
2
Those which must be accessible by other systems.
 
3
A partially ordered set of exercises.
 
4
A system that supports this search-and-extraction, resulting in an extension to the ontology, has been developed but is not yet published.
 
Literature
1.
Ai-Chang, M., Bresina, J., Charest, L., Chase, A., Hsu, J.J., Jonsson, A., Kanefsky, B., Morris, P., Rajan, K., Yglesias, J., Chafin, B., Dias, W., Maldague, P.: MAPGEN: mixed-initiative planning and scheduling for the Mars exploration rover mission. IEEE Intell. Syst. 19(1), 8–12 (2004)CrossRef
2.
Androutsopoulos, I., Lampouras, G., Galanis, D.: Generating natural language descriptions from OWL ontologies: the NaturalOWL system. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 48, 671–715 (2013)MATH
3.
Behnke, G., Ponomaryov, D., Schiller, M., Bercher, P., Nothdurft, F., Glimm, B., Biundo, S.: Coherence across components in cognitive systems – one ontology to rule them all. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1442–1449. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (2015)
4.
Behnke, G., Höller, D., Bercher, P., Biundo, S.: Change the plan – how hard can that be? In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS). AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (2016)
5.
Bercher, P., Höller, D.: Interview with David E. Smith. Künstl. Intell. (2016). doi:10.1007/s13218-015-0403-y. Special Issue on Companion Technologies
6.
Bercher, P., Biundo, S., Geier, T., Hoernle, T., Nothdurft, F., Richter, F., Schattenberg, B.: Plan, repair, execute, explain - how planning helps to assemble your home theater. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS), pp. 386–394. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (2014)
7.
Bercher, P., Richter, F., Hörnle, T., Geier, T., Höller, D., Behnke, G., Nothdurft, F., Honold, F., Minker, W., Weber, M., Biundo, S.: A planning-based assistance system for setting up a home theater. In: Proceedings of the 29th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (2015)
8.
Biundo, S., Schattenberg, B.: From abstract crisis to concrete relief (a preliminary report on combining state abstraction and HTN planning). In: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Planning (ECP), pp. 157–168. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (2001)
9.
Biundo, S., Höller, D., Schattenberg, B., Bercher, P.: Companion-technology: an overview. Künstl. Intell. (2016). doi:10.1007/s13218-015-0419-3. Special Issue on Companion Technologies
10.
Borgida, A., Franconi, E., Horrocks, I.: Explaining ALC subsumption. In: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), pp. 209–213. IOS Press, Palo Alto, CA (2000)
11.
Byrne, R.: Planning meals: problem solving on a real data-base. Cognition 5, 287–332 (1977)CrossRef
12.
Erol, K., Hendler, J.A., Nau, D.S.: UMCP: a sound and complete procedure for hierarchical task-network planning. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems (AIPS), pp. 249–254. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (1994)
13.
Ferguson, G., Allen, J.F.: TRIPS: an integrated intelligent problem-solving assistant. In: Proceedings of the 15h National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 567–572. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (1998)
14.
Geier, T., Bercher, P.: On the decidability of HTN planning with task insertion. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1955–1961. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (2011)
15.
Gil, Y.: Description logics and planning. AI Mag. 26(2), 73–84 (2005)
16.
Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., Koller, F.: AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In: Mensch & Computer 2003: Interaktion in Bewegung, pp. 187–196. Teubner, Wiesbaden (2003)
17.
Hayes-Roth, B., Hayes-Roth, F.: A cognitive model of planning. Cogn. Sci. 3, 275–310 (1979)CrossRef
18.
Honold, F., Schüssel, F., Weber, M.: Adaptive probabilistic fission for multimodal systems. In: Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference (OzCHI), pp. 222–231. ACM, New York (2012)
19.
Horridge, M.: Justification based explanations in ontologies. Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester (2011)
20.
Horridge, M., Drummond, N., Goodwin, J., Rector, A., Stevens, R., Wang, H.H.: The Manchester OWL syntax. In: Proceedings of the OWLED’06 Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions, vol. 216 (2006). CEUR Workshop Proceedings
21.
Kuhn, T.: The understandability of OWL statements in controlled English. Semantic Web 4(1), 101–115 (2013)
22.
Lin, N., Kuter, U., Sirin, E.: Web service composition with user preferences. In: The Semantic Web: Research and Applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5021, pp. 629–643. Springer, Berlin (2008)
23.
Madsen, M., Gregor, S.: Measuring human-computer trust. In: Proceedings of the 11th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS), pp. 6–8 (2000)
24.
McAllester, D., Rosenblitt, D.: Systematic nonlinear planning. In: Proceedings of the 9th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 634–639. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (1991)
25.
Myers, K.L., Jarvis, P., Tyson, M., Wolverton, M.: A mixed-initiative framework for robust plan sketching. In: 13th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS), pp. 256–266. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA (2003)
26.
Nau, D.S., Au, T.C., Ilghami, O., Kuter, U., Muñoz-Avila, H., Murdock, J.W., Wu, D., Yaman, F.: Applications of SHOP and SHOP2. IEEE Intell. Syst. 20(2), 34–41 (2005)CrossRef
27.
NCICB (NCI Center for Bioinformatics): http://​ncicb.​nci.​nih.​gov/​xml/​owl/​EVS/​ (2015). Thesaurus.owl. Accessed 9 Feb 2015
28.
Nguyen, T.A.T., Power, R., Piwek, P., Williams, S.: Predicting the understandability of OWL inferences. In: The Semantic Web: Semantics and Big Data. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7882, pp. 109–123. Springer, Berlin (2013)
29.
Nothdurft, F., Richter, F., Minker, W.: Probabilistic human-computer trust handling. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 51–59. ACL, Menlo Park, CA (2014). http://​www.​aclweb.​org/​anthology/​W14-4307
30.
Nothdurft, F., Behnke, G., Bercher, P., Biundo, S., Minker, W.: The interplay of user-centered dialog systems and AI planning. In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL), pp. 344–353. ACL, Menlo Park, CA (2015)
31.
Penberthy, J.S., Weld, D.S.: UCPOP: a sound, complete, partial order planner for ADL. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), pp. 103–114. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA (1992)
32.
Pichler, M., Seufert, T.: Two strategies to measure cognitive load. In: EARLI Conference 2011. Education for a Global Networked Society, pp. 928–929. European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Leuven (2011)
33.
Pulido, J.C., González, J.C., González-Ferrer, A., García, J., Fernández, F., Bandera, A., Bustos, P., Suárez, C.: Goal-directed generation of exercise sets for upper-limb rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Knowledge Engineering for Planning and Scheduling (KEPS), pp. 38–45 (2014)
34.
Schiller, M., Glimm, B.: Towards explicative inference for OWL. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Description Logic Workshop, vol. 1014, pp. 930–941. CEUR (2013)
35.
36.
Sirin, E.: Combining description logic reasoning with AI planning for composition of web services. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland at College Park (2006)
37.
Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Wu, D., Hendler, J., Nau, D.: HTN planning for web service composition using SHOP2. Web Semant. 1(4), 377–396 (2004)CrossRef
38.
Tsarkov, D., Horrocks, I.: FaCT++ description logic reasoner: system description. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR), pp. 292–297. Springer, Berlin (2006)
39.
Metadata
Title
To Plan for the User Is to Plan with the User: Integrating User Interaction into the Planning Process
Authors
Gregor Behnke
Florian Nielsen
Marvin Schiller
Denis Ponomaryov
Pascal Bercher
Birte Glimm
Wolfgang Minker
Susanne Biundo
Copyright Year
2017
Book
Companion Technology

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43664-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-43665-4

Copyright Year: 2017

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43665-4_7

Premium Partner

    Image Credits