tech,1-1-P80-1019,bq |
Current
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
have concentrated largely on determining the literal
<term>
meaning
</term>
of
<term>
input
</term>
from their
<term>
users
</term>
.
|
#12528
Currentnatural language interfaces have concentrated largely on determining the literal meaning of input from their users. |
other,11-1-P80-1019,bq |
Current
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
have concentrated largely on determining the literal
<term>
meaning
</term>
of
<term>
input
</term>
from their
<term>
users
</term>
.
|
#12538
Current natural language interfaces have concentrated largely on determining the literalmeaning of input from their users. |
other,13-1-P80-1019,bq |
Current
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
have concentrated largely on determining the literal
<term>
meaning
</term>
of
<term>
input
</term>
from their
<term>
users
</term>
.
|
#12540
Current natural language interfaces have concentrated largely on determining the literal meaning ofinput from their users. |
other,16-1-P80-1019,bq |
Current
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
have concentrated largely on determining the literal
<term>
meaning
</term>
of
<term>
input
</term>
from their
<term>
users
</term>
.
|
#12543
Current natural language interfaces have concentrated largely on determining the literal meaning of input from theirusers. |
tech,2-2-P80-1019,bq |
While such
<term>
decoding
</term>
is an essential underpinning , much recent work suggests that
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerous
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
, such as robust
<term>
communication procedures
</term>
.
|
#12547
While suchdecoding is an essential underpinning, much recent work suggests that natural language interfaces will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerous non-literal aspects of communication, such as robust communication procedures. |
tech,13-2-P80-1019,bq |
While such
<term>
decoding
</term>
is an essential underpinning , much recent work suggests that
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerous
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
, such as robust
<term>
communication procedures
</term>
.
|
#12558
While such decoding is an essential underpinning, much recent work suggests thatnatural language interfaces will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerous non-literal aspects of communication, such as robust communication procedures. |
other,27-2-P80-1019,bq |
While such
<term>
decoding
</term>
is an essential underpinning , much recent work suggests that
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerous
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
, such as robust
<term>
communication procedures
</term>
.
|
#12572
While such decoding is an essential underpinning, much recent work suggests that natural language interfaces will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerousnon-literal aspects of communication, such as robust communication procedures. |
other,35-2-P80-1019,bq |
While such
<term>
decoding
</term>
is an essential underpinning , much recent work suggests that
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerous
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
, such as robust
<term>
communication procedures
</term>
.
|
#12580
While such decoding is an essential underpinning, much recent work suggests that natural language interfaces will never appear cooperative or graceful unless they also incorporate numerous non-literal aspects of communication, such as robustcommunication procedures. |
other,24-3-P80-1019,bq |
This paper defends that view , but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of these
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
; that the new technology of powerful
<term>
personal computers
</term>
with integral
<term>
graphics displays
</term>
offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects , while still satisfying
<term>
human communication needs
</term>
.
|
#12607
This paper defends that view, but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of thesenon-literal aspects of communication; that the new technology of powerful personal computers with integral graphics displays offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects, while still satisfying human communication needs. |
tech,35-3-P80-1019,bq |
This paper defends that view , but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of these
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
; that the new technology of powerful
<term>
personal computers
</term>
with integral
<term>
graphics displays
</term>
offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects , while still satisfying
<term>
human communication needs
</term>
.
|
#12618
This paper defends that view, but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of these non-literal aspects of communication; that the new technology of powerfulpersonal computers with integral graphics displays offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects, while still satisfying human communication needs. |
tech,39-3-P80-1019,bq |
This paper defends that view , but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of these
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
; that the new technology of powerful
<term>
personal computers
</term>
with integral
<term>
graphics displays
</term>
offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects , while still satisfying
<term>
human communication needs
</term>
.
|
#12622
This paper defends that view, but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of these non-literal aspects of communication; that the new technology of powerful personal computers with integralgraphics displays offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects, while still satisfying human communication needs. |
other,55-3-P80-1019,bq |
This paper defends that view , but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of these
<term>
non-literal aspects of communication
</term>
; that the new technology of powerful
<term>
personal computers
</term>
with integral
<term>
graphics displays
</term>
offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects , while still satisfying
<term>
human communication needs
</term>
.
|
#12638
This paper defends that view, but claims that direct imitation of human performance is not the best way to implement many of these non-literal aspects of communication; that the new technology of powerful personal computers with integral graphics displays offers techniques superior to those of humans for these aspects, while still satisfyinghuman communication needs. |
tech,3-4-P80-1019,bq |
The paper proposes
<term>
interfaces
</term>
based on a judicious mixture of these techniques and the still valuable methods of more traditional
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
.
|
#12645
The paper proposesinterfaces based on a judicious mixture of these techniques and the still valuable methods of more traditional natural language interfaces. |
tech,20-4-P80-1019,bq |
The paper proposes
<term>
interfaces
</term>
based on a judicious mixture of these techniques and the still valuable methods of more traditional
<term>
natural language interfaces
</term>
.
|
#12662
The paper proposes interfaces based on a judicious mixture of these techniques and the still valuable methods of more traditionalnatural language interfaces. |