Cited by 35Social Robot Interaction and HRISpeech and dialogue systemsEmotion and Mood Recognition

Continuous interaction with a virtual human

Open access
Reidsma, Dennis, de Kok, Iwan, Neiberg, Daniel, Pammi, Sathish Chandra, van Straalen, Bart, Truong, Khiet, van Welbergen, Herwin·2011·Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces

Abstract

This paper presents our progress in developing a Virtual Human capable of being an attentive speaker. Such a Virtual Human should be able to attend to its interaction partner while it is speaking—and modify its communicative behavior on-the-fly based on what it observes in the behavior of its partner. We report new developments concerning a number of aspects, such as scheduling and interrupting multimodal behavior, automatic classification of listener responses, generation of response eliciting behavior, and strategies for generating appropriate reactions to listener responses. On the basis of this progress, a task-based setup for a responsive Virtual Human was implemented to carry out two user studies, the results of which are presented and discussed in this paper.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12193-011-0060-x

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Elicitation cues used by conversational agents are connected to responses by the human conversation partner.

    “When elicitation cues are used by conversational agents, it has been shown that the cues are actually connected to responses by the human conversation partner, indicating that elicitation cues can be employed by conversational systems (Misu et al., 2011a,b; Reidsma et al., 2011; Buschmeier, 2018).”

    From Modeling Feedback in Interaction With Conversational Agents—A Review (2022) · cites this paper as Reidsma et al., 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 71 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reidsma, D., de Kok, I., Neiberg, D., Pammi, S. C., van Straalen, B., Truong, K., & van Welbergen, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Twente (NL)
  • KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
  • German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence (DE)
Corresponding author
Reidsma, Dennis
Venue
Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces
Published
2011-05-27
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
97-118
ISSN
  • 1783-7677 (ISSN-L)
  • 1783-8738
OpenAlex
W2125552700
Cited by
35
References
71
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 10
FWCI
10.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • University of Twente Research Information (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion)
  • Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld (Universität Bielefeld) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
Keywords
virtual humans, task-based interaction, user study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review