Grad F: Mm - hmm ,
Grad E: And we need all the same machinery .
Grad F: right .
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Grad F: Robert .
Professor C: Well , but , uh , this is very good actually
Grad E: Schade .
Professor C: cuz it it it to the extent that it works , it y
Grad F: Ties it all into it .
Professor C: it it ties together several of of these things .
Grad F: Yeah . Yep .
Grad A: Mm - hmm . Mm - hmm . And I 'm sure gonna read the transcript of this one . So . But the , uh ,  But it 's too bad that we don't have a camera . You know , all the pointing is gonna be lost .
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad F: Oh , yeah .
Grad B: Well every time Nancy giggles it means it means that it 's your job .
Grad F: Yeah , that 's why I said " point to Robert " , when I did it .
Grad A: Uh . Yeah . Mmm , isn't I mean , I 'm I was sort of dubious why why he even introduces this sort of reality , you know , as your basic mental space and then builds up Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Grad A: d doesn't start with some because it 's so obvi it should be so obvious , at least it is to me , {comment} that whenever I say something I could preface that with " I think . " Nuh ?
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad A: So there should be no categorical difference between your base and all the others that ensue .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: No , but there 's there 's a Gricean thing going on there , that when you say " I think " you 're actually hedging .
Grad E: Yeah , I mean Grad F: Mmm . It 's like I don't totally think Professor C: Right .
Grad E: Yeah . Y
Grad F: I mostly think , uh Grad A: Yeah , it 's Absolutely .
Grad E: Yeah , it 's an it 's an evidential . It 's sort of semi - grammaticalized . People have talked about it this way . And you know , you can do sort of special things . You can , th put just the phrase " I think " as a parenthetical in the middle of a sentence and so on , and so forth .
Grad A: Yeah .
Grad E: So Grad F: Actually one of the child language researchers who works with T Tomasello studied a bunch of these constructions and it was like it 's not using any kind of interesting embedded ways just to mark , you know , uncertainty or something like that .
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad F: So .
Grad A: Yeah , but about linguistic hedges , I mean , those those tend to be , um , funky anyways because they blur Professor C: So we don't have that in here either do we ?
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad F: Hedges ?
Professor C: Yeah , yeah .
Grad F: Hhh , {comment} I there used to be a slot for speaker , um , it was something like factivity . I couldn't really remember what it meant
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad F: so I took it out .
Grad E: Um .
Grad F: But it 's something Grad E: Well we were just talking about this sort of evidentiality and stuff like that , right ?
Grad F: we we were talking about sarcasm too , right ? Oh , oh .
Grad E: I mean ,
Grad F: Oh , yeah , yeah , right .
Grad E: that 's what I think is , um , sort of telling you what percent reality you should give this
Professor C: So we probably should .
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Grad E: or the , you know Professor C: Confidence or something like that .
Grad E: Yeah , and the fact that I 'm , you know the fact maybe if I think it versus he thinks that might , you know , depending on how much you trust the two of us or whatever ,
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad A: Uh great word in the English language is called " about " .
Grad E: you know Grad A: If you study how people use that it 's also Grad F: What 's the word ?
Grad A: " about . " It 's about Professor C: About .
Grad A: clever .
Professor C: Oh , that in that use of " about " , yeah .
Grad F: Oh , oh , oh , as a hedge .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: And I think And I think y if you want us to spend a pleasant six or seven hours you could get George started on that .
Grad E: He wrote a paper about thirty - five years ago on that one .
Grad B: I r I read that paper ,
Professor C: Yeah .
Grad B: the hedges paper ? I read some of that paper actually .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: Yeah .
Grad E: Would you believe that that paper lead directly to the development of anti - lock brakes ?
Grad F: What ?
Professor C: No .
Grad E: Ask me about it later I 'll tell you how . When we 're not on tape .
Grad F: I 'd love to know .
Grad B: Oh , man .
Grad F: So , and and I think , uh , someone had raised like sarcasm as a complication at some point .
Professor C: There 's all that stuff . Yeah , let 's I I don't I think Grad F: And we just won't deal with sarcastic people .
Professor C: Yeah , I mean Grad E: I don't really know what like We we don't have to care too much about the speaker attitude , right ? Like there 's not so many different hhh , {comment} I don't know , m
Grad F: Certainly not as some Well , they 're intonational markers I think for the most part .
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad F: I don't know too much about the like grammatical Grad E: I just mean There 's lots of different attitudes that that the speaker could have and that we can clearly identify , and so on , and so forth .
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad E: But like what are the distinctions among those that we actually care about for our current purposes ?
Professor C: Right . Right , so , uh , this this raises the question of what are our current purposes .
Grad F: Mm - hmm .
Professor C: Right ?
Grad E: Oh , shoot .
Grad F: Oh , yeah , do we have any ?
Grad E: Here it is three - fifteen already .
Grad A: Mmm . Yeah .
Professor C: Uh , so , um , I I don't know the answer but but , um , it does seem that , you know , this is this is coming along . I think it 's it 's converging . It 's as far as I can tell there 's this one major thing we have to do which is the mental the whole s mental space thing . And then there 's some other minor things .
Grad F: Mm - hmm .
Professor C: Um , and we 're going to have to s sort of bound the complexity . I mean , if we get everything that anybody ever thought about you know , w we 'll go nuts .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: So we had started with the idea that the actual , uh , constraint was related to this tourist domain and the kinds of interactions that might occur in the tourist domain , assuming that people were being helpful and weren't trying to d you know , there 's all sorts of God knows , irony , and stuff like which you isn't probably of much use in dealing with a tourist guide .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: Yeah ?
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: Uh .
Grad F: M mockery .
Professor C: Right . Whatever . So y uh , no end of things th that that , you know , we don't deal with .
Grad A: But it Professor C: And Grad A: i isn't that part easy though
Professor C: Go ahead .
Grad A: because in terms of the s simspec , it would just mean you put one more set of brack brackets around it , and then just tell it to sort of negate whatever the content of that is in terms of irony
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: N no .
Grad F: Mmm .
Grad A: or Professor C: No .
Grad E: Right .
Grad F: Maybe .
Professor C: No .
Grad F: Yeah , in model theory cuz the semantics is always like " speaker believes not - P " , you know ?
Professor C: Right .
Grad F: Like " the speaker says P and believes not - P " .
Grad E: We have a theoretical model of sarcasm now .
Grad F: But Professor C: Right .
Grad E: Yeah , right , I mean .
Professor C: No , no .
Grad F: Right , right , but ,
Professor C: Anyway , so so , um , I guess uh , let me make a proposal on how to proceed on that , which is that , um , it was Keith 's , uh , sort of job over the summer to come up with this set of constructions . Uh , and my suggestion to Keith is that you , over the next couple weeks , n
Grad E: Mmm .
Professor C: don't try to do them in detail or formally but just try to describe which ones you think we ought to have .
Grad E: OK .
Professor C: Uh , and then when Robert gets back we 'll look at the set of them .
Grad E: OK .
Professor C: Just just sort of , you know , define your space .
Grad E: Yeah , OK .
Professor C: And , um , so th these are this is a set of things that I think we ought to deal with .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: And then we 'll we 'll we 'll go back over it and w people will will give feedback on it .
Grad E: OK .
Professor C: And then then we 'll have a at least initial spec of of what we 're actually trying to do .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: And that 'll also be useful for anybody who 's trying to write a parser .
Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Professor C: Knowing uh Grad E: In case there 's any around .
Grad F: If we knew anybody like that .
Professor C: Right , " who might want " et cetera . So , uh Grad E: OK .
Professor C: So a and we get this this , uh , portals fixed and then we have an idea of the sort of initial range . And then of course Nancy you 're gonna have to , uh , do your set of but you have to do that anyway .
Grad F: For the same , yeah , data . Yeah , mm - hmm .
Professor C: So so we 're gonna get the w we 're basically dealing with two domains , the tourist domain and the and the child language learning .
Grad B: Mmm .
Professor C: And we 'll see what we need for those two . And then my proposal would be to , um , not totally cut off more general discussion but to focus really detailed work on the subset of things that we 've we really want to get done .
Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Professor C: And then as a kind of separate thread , think about the more general things and and all that .
Grad E: Mm - hmm . Mm - hmm .
Grad A: Well , I also think the detailed discussion will hit you know , bring us to problems that are of a general nature and maybe even Professor C: Uh , without doubt . Yeah .
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad A: even suggest some solutions .
Professor C: But what I want to do is is is to to constrain the things that we really feel responsible for .
Grad A: Yeah . Mmm .
Professor C: So that that we say these are the things we 're really gonna try do by the end of the summer
Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Professor C: and other things we 'll put on a list of of research problems or something , because you can easily get to the point where nothing gets done because every time you start to do something you say , " oh , yeah , but what about this case ? "
Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Professor C: This is this is called being a linguist .
Grad A: Mmm .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: And , uh ,
Grad E: Basically .
Grad F: Or me .
Professor C: Huh ?
Grad F: Or me . Anyways Grad B: There 's that quote in Jurafsky and Martin where where it goes where some guy goes , " every time I fire a linguist the performance of the recognizer goes up . "
Professor C: Right .
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad E: Exactly .
Professor C: Right . But anyway . So , is is that does that make sense as a , uh a general way to proceed ?
Grad F: Sure , yeah .
Grad E: Yeah , yeah , we 'll start with that , just figuring out what needs to be done then actually the next step is to start trying to do it .
Professor C: Exactly right .
Grad A: Mmm .
Grad E: Got it .
Grad A: Mmm .
Grad E: OK .
Grad A: We have a little bit of news , uh , just minor stuff . The one big Grad B: Ooo , can I ask a Grad E: You ran out of power .
Grad A: Huh ?
Grad B: Can I ask a quick question about this side ?
Grad A: Yeah .
Grad F: Yes .
Grad B: Is this , uh was it intentional to leave off things like " inherits " and Grad F: Oops . Um ,
Grad E: No .
Grad F: not really just on the constructions , right ?
Grad B: Yeah , like constructions can inherit from other things ,
Grad F: Um ,
Grad B: am I right ?
Grad F: yeah .
Grad B: Yeah .
Grad F: I didn't want to think too much about that for for now .
Grad B: OK .
Professor C: Yeah .
Grad F: So , uh , maybe it was subconsciously intentional .
Professor C: Yeah , uh yeah .
Grad E: Um , yeah , there should be I I wanted to s find out someday if there was gonna be some way of dealing with , uh , if this is the right term , multiple inheritance ,
Professor C: Mm - hmm .
Grad E: where one construction is inheriting from , uh from both parents ,
Grad F: Uh - huh . Yep .
Grad E: uh , or different ones , or three or four different ones .
Professor C: Yeah . So let me Grad E: Cuz the problem is that then you have to Grad F: Yeah .
Grad E: which of you know , which are how they 're getting bound together .
Grad F: Refer to them .
Professor C: Yeah , right , right , right . Yeah , yeah , yeah .
Grad F: Yeah , and and there are certainly cases like that . Even with just semantic schemas we have some examples .
Professor C: Right .
Grad F: So , and we 've been talking a little bit about that anyway .
Professor C: Yeah . So what I would like to do is separate that problem out .
Grad F: Inherits .
Professor C: So um ,
Grad E: OK .
Professor C: my argument is there 's nothing you can do with that that you can't do by just having more constructions .
Grad E: Yeah , yes .
Professor C: It 's uglier and it d doesn't have the deep linguistic insights and stuff .
Grad E: That 's right .
Professor C: Uh ,
Grad E: But whatever .
Professor C: Right .
Grad E: Yeah , no , no , no no .
Grad F: Uh , those are over rated .
Grad E: No , by all means ,
Professor C: And so I what I 'd like to do is is in the short run focus on getting it right .
Grad E: right . Uh , sure .
Professor C: And when we think we have it right then saying , " aha ! ,
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: can we make it more elegant ? "
Grad E: Yeah , that 's Professor C: Can can we , uh What are the generalizations , and stuff ?
Grad E: Yeah . Connect the dots . Yeah .
Professor C: But rather than try to guess a inheritance structure and all that sort of stuff before we know what we 're doing .
Grad E: Yep . Yeah .
Professor C: So I would say in the short run we 're not gonna b
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor C: First of all , we 're not doing them yet at all . And and it could be that half way through we say , " aha ! , we we now see how we want to clean it up . "
Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Professor C: Uh , and inheritance is only one I mean , that 's one way to organize it but there are others . And it may or may not be the best way .
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad A: Mmm .
Professor C: I 'm sorry , you had news .
Grad A: Oh , just small stuff . Um , thanks to Eva on our web site we can now , if you want to run JavaBayes , uh , you could see get download these classes . And then it will enable you she modified the GUI so it has now a m a m a button menu item for saving it into the embedded JavaBayes format .
Grad D: Mm - hmm .
Grad B: Mmm .
Grad A: So that 's wonderful .
Professor C: Great .
Grad A: And , um and she , a You tested it out . Do you want to say something about that , that it works , right ? With the Grad D: I was just checking like , when we wanna , um , get the posterior probability of , like , variables . You know how you asked whether we can , like , just observe all the variables like in the same list ? You can't .
Grad A: Uh - huh .
Grad D: You have to make separate queries every time .
Grad A: OK , that 's that 's a bit unfortunate
Grad D: So Yeah .
Grad A: but for the time being it 's it 's it 's fine to do it Grad D: You just have to have a long list of , you know , all the variables .
Grad A: Yeah . But uh Grad D: Basically .
Grad F: Uh , all the things you want to query , you just have to like ask for separately .
Grad D: Yeah , yeah .
Grad A: Well that 's probably maybe in the long term that 's good news because it forces us to think a little bit more carefully how how we want to get an out output . Um , but that 's a different discussion for a different time . And , um , I don't know . We 're really running late , so I had , uh , an idea yesterday but , uh , I don't know whether we should even start discussing .
Professor C: W what Yeah , sure , tell us what it is .
Grad A: Um , the construal bit that , um , has been pointed to but hasn't been , um , made precise by any means , um , may w may work as follows . I thought that we would , uh that the following thing would be in incredibly nice and I have no clue whether it will work at all or nothing . So that 's just a tangent , a couple of mental disclaimers here . Um , imagine you you write a Bayes - net , um Grad F: Bayes ?
Grad A: Bayes - net ,
Grad F: OK .
Grad A: um , completely from scratch every time you do construal . So you have nothing . Just a white piece of paper .
Professor C: Mmm , right .
Grad A: You consult consult your ontology which will tell you a bunch of stuff , and parts , and properties , uh - uh - uh
Grad F: Grout out the things that that you need .
Professor C: Right .
Grad A: then y you 'd simply write , uh , these into onto your your white piece of paper . And you will get a lot of notes and stuff out of there . You won't get you won't really get any C P T 's , therefore we need everything that that configures to what the situation is , IE , the context dependent stuff . So you get whatever comes from discourse but also filtered . Uh , so only the ontology relevant stuff from the discourse plus the situation and the user model .
Grad F: Mm - hmm .
Grad A: And that fills in your CPT 's with which you can then query , um , the the net that you just wrote and find out how thing X is construed as an utterance U . And the embedded JavaBayes works exactly like that , that once you we have , you know , precise format in which to write it , so we write it down . You query it . You get the result , and you throw it away . And the the nice thing about this idea is that you don't ever have to sit down and think about it or write about it . You may have some general rules as to how things can be can be construed as what , so that will allow you to craft the the the initial notes . But it 's in that respect it 's completely scalable . Because it doesn't have any prior , um , configuration . It 's just you need an ontology of the domain and you need the context dependent modules . And if this can be made to work at all , that 'd be kind of funky .
Professor C: Um , it sounds to me like you want P R
Grad A: P R Ms - uh , PRM I mean , since you can unfold a PRM into a straightforward Bayes - net Professor C: Beca - because it b because No , no , you can't . See the the critical thing about the PRM is it gives these relations in general form . So once you have instantiated the PRM with the instances and ther then you can then you can unfold it .
Grad A: Then you can . Mm - hmm , yeah . No , I was m using it generic . So , uh , probabilistic , whatever , relational models . Whatever you write it . In Professor C: Well , no , but it matters a lot because you what you want are these generalized rules about the way things relate , th that you then instantiate in each case .
Grad A: And then then instantiate them . That 's ma maybe the the way the only way it works .
Professor C: Yeah , and that 's Grad A :
Professor C: Yeah , that 's the only way it could work . I we have a our local expert on P R uh , but my guess is that they 're not currently good enough to do that . But we 'll we 'll have to see .
Grad A: But , uh ,
Professor C: Uh Yes . This is that 's that would be a good thing to try . It 's related to the Hobbs abduction story in that you th you throw everything into a pot and you try to come up with the , uh Grad A: Except there 's no no theorem prover involved .
Grad F: Best explanation .
Professor C: No , there isn't a theorem prover but there but but the , um , The cove the the P R Ms are like rules of inference and you 're you 're coupling a bunch of them together .
Grad A: Mm - hmm , yeah .
Professor C: And then ins instead of proving you 're trying to , you know , compute the most likely . Uh Tricky . But you yeah , it 's a good it 's a it 's a good thing to put in your thesis proposal .
Grad A: What 's it ?
Professor C: So are you gonna write something for us before you go ?
Grad A: Yes . Um .
Professor C: Oh , you have something .
Grad A: In the process thereof , or whatever .
Professor C: OK . So , what 's what when are we gonna meet again ?
Grad F: When are you leaving ?
Grad A: Fri - uh ,
Grad F: Thursday , Friday ?
Grad A: Thursday 's my last day here .
Grad D: Fri
Professor C: Yeah .
Grad F: OK .
Grad A: So I would suggest as soon as possible . Do you mean by we , the whole ben gang ?
Professor C: N no , I didn't mean y just the two of us . We obviously we can we can do this . But the question is do you want to , for example , send the little group , uh , a draft of your thesis proposal and get , uh , another session on feedback on that ? Or Grad A: We can do it Th - Thursday again . Yeah .
Grad E: Fine with me . Should we do the one PM time for Thursday since we were on that before or ?
Grad A: Sure .
Grad E: OK .
Professor C: Alright .
Grad D: Hmm .
Grad A: Thursday at one ? I can also maybe then sort of run through the , uh the talk I have to give at EML which highlights all of our work .
Professor C: OK .
Grad A: And we can make some last minute changes on that .
Professor C: OK .
Grad B: You can just give him the abstract that we wrote for the paper .
Professor C: That - that 'll tell him exactly what 's going on . Yeah , that Alright .
Grad F: Can we do can we do one - thirty ?
Grad A: No .
Grad F: Oh , you already told me no .
Grad A: But we can do four .
Grad F: One , OK , it 's fine . I can do one . It 's fine . It 's fine .
Grad A: One or four . I don't care .
Grad E: To me this is equal . I don't care .
Grad A: If it 's equal for all ? What should we do ?
Grad F: Yeah , it 's fine .
Grad A: Four ?
Grad F: Fine . Yeah no , no , no , uh , I don't care . It 's fine .
Grad A: It 's equal to all of us , so you can decide one or four .
Grad B: The pressure 's on you Nancy .
Grad A: Liz actually said she likes four because it forces the Meeting Recorder people to cut , you know the discussions short .
Grad F: OK . OK , four .
Grad E: Well , if you insist , then .
Grad F: OK ? OK . I am .