Compiling Grammar-based Speech Application ... - CiteSeerX

16 Introduction
7 Related Work
7.1 GF in Interactive Speech Applications
In addition to the work presented in this thesis, there are several other possibilities
for using GF grammars in interactive speech applications.
• The main GF implementation has a Haskell API 1 which can be used for
parsing and linearization in natural language applications.
• The Embedded GF Interpreter (Bringert 2005) can be used for parsing and
linearization in Java programs, and as an OAA (Martin et al. 1999) agent.
Several experimental dialogue systems have been developed (Ericsson et al.
2006) using this interpreter along with the speech-recognition grammar
generation described in this thesis.
• Peter Ljunglöf has implemented a Prolog library 2 for parsing with GF
grammars.
• Jonson (2006) shows how to generate statistical language models for dialogue
systems from GF grammars, instead of the grammar-based models
that we generate.
7.2 Compiler-like Grammar Development
The Regulus grammar compiler (Rayner et al. 2006b) generates speech recognition
grammars, with the possibility of embedding basic semantic interpretation,
from unification grammars. Regulus has been used in several interactive speech
applications, including the MedSLT (Bouillon et al. 2005; Rayner et al. 2006a)
speech translator, and the Clarissa (Rayner et al. 2005b,c) dialogue system.
UNIANCE (Bos 2002) is another system for compiling unification grammars
to speech recognition grammars. It includes interpretation code for compositional
semantics in the generated grammars.
The SGStudio (Wang and Acero 2005) grammar authoring tool uses a hybrid
model for development of speech recognition language models and semantic
interpretation. A library of parameterized grammars are used for slot-filling,
while a statistical model handles the non-slot-filling parts of user input.
ARIADNE (Denecke 2002) is a dialogue system architecture for rapid prototyping.
To build a dialogue system, the developer creates an ontology, parsing
grammars, generation templates, database conversion rules, and a description
of the services offered by the system. In ARIADNE, the developer writes a set
of declarative specifications which together are used in a fixed dialogue system
architecture, whereas we generate a number of components, which can be used
separately, from a specification in a single formalism. Compared to ARIADNE,
we lack the generic dialogue management and database interface components.
1 See http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~aarne/GF/src/GF/Embed/EmbedAPI.hs
2 See http://www.ling.gu.se/~peb/software.html