Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Mark Dingemanse

dblp:119/7918 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
14ranked-venue papers
2as first author
6since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-3290-5723ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 14 · 2 first-author · 6 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 9 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Information extraction and text analysis · 100%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computational social science and digital humanities
language documentation
0.212022
From text to talk: Harnessing conversational corpora for humane and diversity-aware language technology · ACL (1) 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

corpus analysis · 1.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Putting interaction center-stage for the study of knowledge structures and processes
Joanna Raczaszek-Leonardi, Kristian Tylén, Mark Dingemanse, Linda B. Smith, Hadar Karmazyn Raz, Nicholas J. Enfield, Rachel W. Kallen, Michael J. Richardson, Verónica Romero 0002, Tahiya Chowdhury, Alexandra Paxton, Julian Zubek
CogSci3
2023 The timing bottleneck: Why timing and overlap are mission-critical for conversational user interfaces, speech recognition and dialogue systems
abstract
Speech recognition systems are a key intermediary in voice-driven human-computer interaction.Although speech recognition works well for pristine monologic audio, real-life use cases in open-ended interactive settings still present many challenges.We argue that timing is mission-critical for dialogue systems, and evaluate 5 major commercial ASR systems for their conversational and multilingual support.We find that word error rates for natural conversational data in 6 languages remain abysmal, and that overlap remains a key challenge (study 1).This impacts especially the recognition of conversational words (study 2), and in turn has dire consequences for downstream intent recognition (study 3).Our findings help to evaluate the current state of conversational ASR, contribute towards multidimensional error analysis and evaluation, and identify phenomena that need most attention on the way to build robust interactive speech technologies.
Andreas Liesenfeld, Alianda Lopez, Mark Dingemanse
SIGDIAL3
2022 From text to talk: Harnessing conversational corpora for humane and diversity-aware language technology
abstract
Informal social interaction is the primordial home of human language.Linguistically diverse conversational corpora are an important and largely untapped resource for computational linguistics and language technology.Through the efforts of a worldwide language documentation movement, such corpora are increasingly becoming available.We show how interactional data from 63 languages (26 families) harbours insights about turn-taking, timing, sequential structure and social action, with implications for language technology, natural language understanding, and the design of conversational interfaces.Harnessing linguistically diverse conversational corpora will provide the empirical foundations for flexible, localizable, humane language technologies of the future.
Mark Dingemanse, Andreas Liesenfeld
ACL (1)1
2022 Bottom-up discovery of structure and variation in response tokens ('backchannels') across diverse languages
abstract
Contains fulltext : 288934.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)
Andreas Liesenfeld, Mark Dingemanse
INTERSPEECH2
2022 Building and curating conversational corpora for diversity-aware language science and technology
abstract
We present an analysis pipeline and best practice guidelines for building and curating corpora of everyday conversation in diverse languages. Surveying language documentation corpora and other resources that cover 67 languages and varieties from 28 phyla, we describe the compilation and curation process, specify minimal properties of a unified format for interactional data, and develop methods for quality control that take into account turn-taking and timing. Two case studies show the broad utility of conversational data for (i) charting human interactional infrastructure and (ii) tracing challenges and opportunities for current ASR solutions. Linguistically diverse conversational corpora can provide new insights for the language sciences and stronger empirical foundations for language technology.
Andreas Liesenfeld, Mark Dingemanse
LREC2
2021 Computational challenges in explaining communication: How deep the rabbit hole goes
Laura van de Braak, Mark Dingemanse, Ivan Toni, Iris van Rooij, Mark Blokpoel
CogSci2
2020 Computational mechanisms for resolving misunderstandings
Laura van de Braak, Mark Blokpoel, Mark Dingemanse, Ivan Toni, Iris van Rooij
CogSci3
2020 A simple repair mechanism can alleviate computational demands of pragmatic reasoning: simulations and complexity analysis
abstract
How can people communicate successfully while keeping resource costs low in the face of ambiguity?We present a principled theoretical analysis comparing two strategies for disambiguation in communication: (i) pragmatic reasoning, where communicators reason about each other, and (ii) other-initiated repair, where communicators signal and resolve trouble interactively.Using agent-based simulations and computational complexity analyses, we compare the efficiency of these strategies in terms of communicative success, computation cost and interaction cost.We show that agents with a simple repair mechanism can increase efficiency, compared to pragmatic agents, by reducing their computational burden at the cost of longer interactions.We also find that efficiency is highly contingent on the mechanism, highlighting the importance of explicit formalisation and computational rigour.
Jacqueline van Arkel, Marieke Woensdregt, Mark Dingemanse, Mark Blokpoel
CoNLL3
2019 Contextualizing Conversational Strategies: Backchannel, Repair and Linguistic Alignment in Spontaneous and Task-Oriented Conversations
Christina Dideriksen, Riccardo Fusaroli, Kristian Tylén, Mark Dingemanse, Morten H. Christiansen
CogSci4
2017 Measures and mechanisms of common ground: backchannels, conversational repair, and interactive alignment in free and task-oriented social interactions
Riccardo Fusaroli, Kristian Tylén, Katrine Garly, Jakob Steensig, Morten H. Christiansen, Mark Dingemanse
CogSci6
2016 Synthesized size-sound sound-symbolism
Gwilym Lockwood, Peter Hagoort, Mark Dingemanse
CogSci3
2015 Sound-Symbolism is Disrupted in Dyslexia: Implications for the Role of Cross-Modal Abstraction Processes
Linda Drijvers, Lorijn Zaadnoordijk, Mark Dingemanse
CogSci3
2015 Emergence of systematic iconicity: transmission, interaction and analogy
Tessa Verhoef, Sean Roberts, Mark Dingemanse
CogSci3
2012 The semantic structure of sensory vocabulary in an African language
Mark Dingemanse, Asifa Majid
CogSci1