Using cognitive models to understand multimodal processes: the case for speech and gesture production

S. Kopp, K. Bergmann
{"title":"Using cognitive models to understand multimodal processes: the case for speech and gesture production","authors":"S. Kopp, K. Bergmann","doi":"10.1145/3015783.3015791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multimodal behavior has been studied for a long time and in many fields, e.g., in psychology, linguistics, communication studies, education, and ergonomics. One of the main motivations has been to allow humans to use technical systems intuitively, in a way that resembles and fosters human users' natural way of interacting and thinking [Oviatt 2013]. This has sparked early work on multimodal human-computer interfaces, including recent approaches to recognize communicative behavior and even subtle multimodal cues by computer systems. Those approaches, for the most part, rest on machine learning techniques applied to large sets of behavioral data. As datasets grow larger in size and coverage, and computational power increases, suitable data-driven techniques are able to detect correlational behavior patterns that support answering questions like which feature( s) to take into account or how to recognize them in specific contexts. However, natural multimodal interaction in humans entails a plethora of behavioral variations and intricacies (e.g., when to act unimodally vs. multimodally, with which specific behaviors or multi-level coordination between them). Possible underlying patterns are hard to detect, even in large datasets, and often such variations are attributed to context-dependencies or individual differences. How they come about is still hard to explain at the behavioral level. \n \nOne additional level of explanation that can help to deepen our understanding, and to establish systematic and generalized accounts, involves cognitive processes that lead to a particular multimodal response in a specific situation (e.g., see Chapter 2; [James et al. 2017]). A prominent example is the concept of cognitive load or \"mental workload.\" Many behavioral variations in spoken language have been meaningfully explained in terms of heightened or lowered cognitive load of the speaker. For example, under high cognitive load speakers are found to speak more slowly, to produce more silent or filled pauses, and to utter more repetitions [Jameson et al. 2010]. Likewise, human users distribute information across multiple modalities in order to manage their cognitive limits [Oviatt et al. 2004, Chen et al. 2012]. In studies with elementary school children as well as adults, active manual gesturing was demonstrated to improve memory during a task that required explaining math solutions [Goldin-Meadow et al. 2001]. This effect of gesturing increased with higher task difficulty. Such behavioral phenomena are commonly explained based on cognitive concepts like cognitive load and, further, underlying processes like modality-specific working memories [Baddeley 1992] or competition for cognitive resources [Wickens et al. 1983]. \n \nCognitive theories also provide valuable hints as to how to design multimodal human-machine interaction. To continue with the above example, it has been suggested that certain multimodal interfaces help users to minimize their cognitive load and hence improve their performance. For instance, the physical activity of manual or pen-based gesturing can play a particularly important role in organizing and facilitating people's spatial information processing, which has been shown to reduce cognitive load on tasks involving geometry, maps, and similar areas [Alibali et al. 2000, Oviatt 1997]. Other research revealed that expressively powerful interfaces not only help to cope with interaction problems, but also substantially facilitate human cognition by functioning as \"thinking tools\" [Oviatt 2013]. It is for these reasons that \"Cognitive Science has and will continue to play an essential role in guiding the design of multimodal systems\" [Oviatt and Cohen 2015, p. 33]. \n \nOne particularly explicit form of a cognitive account is a cognitive model. In general, a cognitive model is a simplified, schematic description of cognitive processes for the purposes of understanding or predicting a certain behavior. This approach is markedly pursued in the field of cognitive modeling, which developed at the intersection of cognitive psychology, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. In these fields, cognitive models are primarily developed within generic cognitive architectures like ACT-R [Anderson et al. 2004] or SOAR [Laird 2012], to name two prominent examples, which capture generally assumed structural and functional properties of the human mind. Yet, the term cognitive model is not restricted to the use of such architectures. It can aptly be used whenever a specific notion of cognitive or mental processes is provided in computational terms that afford simulation-based examination and evaluation. This may include symbolic, hybrid, connectionist or dynamical models [cf. Polk and Seifert 2002], and it has been proposed for single cognitive tasks (e.g., memorizing of items), for the interaction of two or more processes (e.g., visual search and language comprehension), or for making specific behavioral predictions (e.g., driving under the influence of alcohol). \n \nIn this chapter, we discuss how computational cognitive models can be useful for the field of multimodal and multisensory interaction. A number of arguments and prospects readily can be identified: from a basic research point of view, a cognitive model can represent a deeper level of understanding in terms of processes and mechanisms that underlie a certain behavior. Such an explanation will have to be hypothetical to some extent, but it potentially bears great scientific value for a number of reasons. First, it is more specific and detailed than most psychological theories (as discussed in Section 6.3). Second, it is predictive rather than purely descriptive, hence affording rigorous evaluation and falsification, e.g., by deriving quantitative predictions in computational simulations and assessing those against empirical data. Finally, cognitive models can provide a common level of description that enables relating and combining insights from different fields of research. For example, they may draw on general findings from working memory or attention to address the question of multimodal or multisensory interaction. From an engineering point of view, cognitive models can help to build better multimodal systems. This holds especially true for cases where data is lacking and inspiration needs to be drawn from theoretical concepts. A computational cognitive model that has proven itself useful in evaluation can provide principles and criteria for the development of algorithms and systems. For example, it may be employed in computational simulations to actively explore distributions of behavioral variations, in order to produce additional training data or help confine a domain to its relevant contingencies, thresholds, or functions. Second, a cognitive model should provide an informed model of the human user and thus can guide the design of multimodal interaction systems. For instance, recognizing and interpreting the user's cognitive processes provides a basis for more adequate system adaptation (a capability that is becoming increasingly important, cf. Section 6.3). Simple assumptions are not realistic here. Cognitive models can be used to formulate and test more detailed and substantiated notions of human processing to improve the design of system algorithms. Likewise, a cognitive model may support identifying situations in which multimodal interaction can enable users to achieve their goals more effectively (e.g., with fewer errors or less cognitive load), where consequences of multimodality for the cognitive processing can be more or less directly observed in the simulations. \n \nClearly, many of the listed potential benefits of computational cognitive models verge on or even go beyond the current state of established knowledge. Thus, we will focus our discussion on one case of natural multimodal behavior that has been extensively researched in this regard, the use of spontaneous speech and gesture in dialogue. We will start by reviewing speech and gesture as a pervasive case of natural multimodal behavior. We will motivate its relevance for practical multimodal interfaces, virtual characters, or social robotics (Section 6.2). Then we will discuss existing theoretical and computational models of the cognitive underpinnings (Section 6.3), and we will elaborate on one particular cognitive model of speech-gesture production that explicates the role of mental representation and memory processes up to a degree that does afford computational simulation under varying conditions (Section 6.4). Using this model, we demonstrate in Section 6.5 how cognitive modeling can be used to gain a better understanding of multimodal production processes and to inform the design of multimodal interactive systems. As an aid to comprehension, readers are referred to this chapter's Focus Questions and to the Glossary for a definition of terminology.","PeriodicalId":222911,"journal":{"name":"The Handbook of Multimodal-Multisensor Interfaces, Volume 1","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Handbook of Multimodal-Multisensor Interfaces, Volume 1","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3015783.3015791","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

Multimodal behavior has been studied for a long time and in many fields, e.g., in psychology, linguistics, communication studies, education, and ergonomics. One of the main motivations has been to allow humans to use technical systems intuitively, in a way that resembles and fosters human users' natural way of interacting and thinking [Oviatt 2013]. This has sparked early work on multimodal human-computer interfaces, including recent approaches to recognize communicative behavior and even subtle multimodal cues by computer systems. Those approaches, for the most part, rest on machine learning techniques applied to large sets of behavioral data. As datasets grow larger in size and coverage, and computational power increases, suitable data-driven techniques are able to detect correlational behavior patterns that support answering questions like which feature( s) to take into account or how to recognize them in specific contexts. However, natural multimodal interaction in humans entails a plethora of behavioral variations and intricacies (e.g., when to act unimodally vs. multimodally, with which specific behaviors or multi-level coordination between them). Possible underlying patterns are hard to detect, even in large datasets, and often such variations are attributed to context-dependencies or individual differences. How they come about is still hard to explain at the behavioral level. One additional level of explanation that can help to deepen our understanding, and to establish systematic and generalized accounts, involves cognitive processes that lead to a particular multimodal response in a specific situation (e.g., see Chapter 2; [James et al. 2017]). A prominent example is the concept of cognitive load or "mental workload." Many behavioral variations in spoken language have been meaningfully explained in terms of heightened or lowered cognitive load of the speaker. For example, under high cognitive load speakers are found to speak more slowly, to produce more silent or filled pauses, and to utter more repetitions [Jameson et al. 2010]. Likewise, human users distribute information across multiple modalities in order to manage their cognitive limits [Oviatt et al. 2004, Chen et al. 2012]. In studies with elementary school children as well as adults, active manual gesturing was demonstrated to improve memory during a task that required explaining math solutions [Goldin-Meadow et al. 2001]. This effect of gesturing increased with higher task difficulty. Such behavioral phenomena are commonly explained based on cognitive concepts like cognitive load and, further, underlying processes like modality-specific working memories [Baddeley 1992] or competition for cognitive resources [Wickens et al. 1983]. Cognitive theories also provide valuable hints as to how to design multimodal human-machine interaction. To continue with the above example, it has been suggested that certain multimodal interfaces help users to minimize their cognitive load and hence improve their performance. For instance, the physical activity of manual or pen-based gesturing can play a particularly important role in organizing and facilitating people's spatial information processing, which has been shown to reduce cognitive load on tasks involving geometry, maps, and similar areas [Alibali et al. 2000, Oviatt 1997]. Other research revealed that expressively powerful interfaces not only help to cope with interaction problems, but also substantially facilitate human cognition by functioning as "thinking tools" [Oviatt 2013]. It is for these reasons that "Cognitive Science has and will continue to play an essential role in guiding the design of multimodal systems" [Oviatt and Cohen 2015, p. 33]. One particularly explicit form of a cognitive account is a cognitive model. In general, a cognitive model is a simplified, schematic description of cognitive processes for the purposes of understanding or predicting a certain behavior. This approach is markedly pursued in the field of cognitive modeling, which developed at the intersection of cognitive psychology, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. In these fields, cognitive models are primarily developed within generic cognitive architectures like ACT-R [Anderson et al. 2004] or SOAR [Laird 2012], to name two prominent examples, which capture generally assumed structural and functional properties of the human mind. Yet, the term cognitive model is not restricted to the use of such architectures. It can aptly be used whenever a specific notion of cognitive or mental processes is provided in computational terms that afford simulation-based examination and evaluation. This may include symbolic, hybrid, connectionist or dynamical models [cf. Polk and Seifert 2002], and it has been proposed for single cognitive tasks (e.g., memorizing of items), for the interaction of two or more processes (e.g., visual search and language comprehension), or for making specific behavioral predictions (e.g., driving under the influence of alcohol). In this chapter, we discuss how computational cognitive models can be useful for the field of multimodal and multisensory interaction. A number of arguments and prospects readily can be identified: from a basic research point of view, a cognitive model can represent a deeper level of understanding in terms of processes and mechanisms that underlie a certain behavior. Such an explanation will have to be hypothetical to some extent, but it potentially bears great scientific value for a number of reasons. First, it is more specific and detailed than most psychological theories (as discussed in Section 6.3). Second, it is predictive rather than purely descriptive, hence affording rigorous evaluation and falsification, e.g., by deriving quantitative predictions in computational simulations and assessing those against empirical data. Finally, cognitive models can provide a common level of description that enables relating and combining insights from different fields of research. For example, they may draw on general findings from working memory or attention to address the question of multimodal or multisensory interaction. From an engineering point of view, cognitive models can help to build better multimodal systems. This holds especially true for cases where data is lacking and inspiration needs to be drawn from theoretical concepts. A computational cognitive model that has proven itself useful in evaluation can provide principles and criteria for the development of algorithms and systems. For example, it may be employed in computational simulations to actively explore distributions of behavioral variations, in order to produce additional training data or help confine a domain to its relevant contingencies, thresholds, or functions. Second, a cognitive model should provide an informed model of the human user and thus can guide the design of multimodal interaction systems. For instance, recognizing and interpreting the user's cognitive processes provides a basis for more adequate system adaptation (a capability that is becoming increasingly important, cf. Section 6.3). Simple assumptions are not realistic here. Cognitive models can be used to formulate and test more detailed and substantiated notions of human processing to improve the design of system algorithms. Likewise, a cognitive model may support identifying situations in which multimodal interaction can enable users to achieve their goals more effectively (e.g., with fewer errors or less cognitive load), where consequences of multimodality for the cognitive processing can be more or less directly observed in the simulations. Clearly, many of the listed potential benefits of computational cognitive models verge on or even go beyond the current state of established knowledge. Thus, we will focus our discussion on one case of natural multimodal behavior that has been extensively researched in this regard, the use of spontaneous speech and gesture in dialogue. We will start by reviewing speech and gesture as a pervasive case of natural multimodal behavior. We will motivate its relevance for practical multimodal interfaces, virtual characters, or social robotics (Section 6.2). Then we will discuss existing theoretical and computational models of the cognitive underpinnings (Section 6.3), and we will elaborate on one particular cognitive model of speech-gesture production that explicates the role of mental representation and memory processes up to a degree that does afford computational simulation under varying conditions (Section 6.4). Using this model, we demonstrate in Section 6.5 how cognitive modeling can be used to gain a better understanding of multimodal production processes and to inform the design of multimodal interactive systems. As an aid to comprehension, readers are referred to this chapter's Focus Questions and to the Glossary for a definition of terminology.
使用认知模型来理解多模态过程:语音和手势产生的案例
在心理学、语言学、传播学、教育学和人体工程学等多个领域,对多模态行为的研究已经进行了很长时间。其中一个主要动机是允许人类直观地使用技术系统,以一种类似并培养人类用户自然的交互和思考方式[Oviatt 2013]。这引发了对多模态人机界面的早期研究,包括最近通过计算机系统识别交流行为甚至微妙的多模态线索的方法。这些方法在很大程度上依赖于应用于大量行为数据集的机器学习技术。随着数据集的规模和覆盖范围越来越大,计算能力也越来越强,合适的数据驱动技术能够检测相关的行为模式,从而支持回答诸如考虑哪些特征或如何在特定环境中识别它们之类的问题。然而,人类自然的多模态交互需要大量的行为变化和复杂性(例如,何时单模态与多模态的行为,具体的行为或它们之间的多层次协调)。即使在大型数据集中,可能的潜在模式也很难检测到,而且这种变化通常归因于上下文依赖性或个体差异。它们是如何产生的仍然很难在行为层面上解释。另一个层次的解释可以帮助加深我们的理解,并建立系统和概括的解释,涉及在特定情况下导致特定多模态反应的认知过程(例如,参见第2章;[James et al. 2017])。一个突出的例子是认知负荷或“精神负荷”的概念。口语中的许多行为变化都可以从说话者认知负荷的增加或降低来进行有意义的解释。例如,在高认知负荷下,说话者会说得更慢,会产生更多的沉默或停顿,并且会重复更多的内容[Jameson et al. 2010]。同样,人类用户通过多种方式分发信息,以管理他们的认知极限[Oviatt et al. 2004, Chen et al. 2012]。在对小学生和成人的研究中,在需要解释数学解决方案的任务中,积极的手势被证明可以改善记忆[Goldin-Meadow等人,2001]。手势的这种效果随着任务难度的增加而增强。这种行为现象通常是基于认知概念,如认知负荷,进一步,潜在的过程,如模式特定的工作记忆[Baddeley 1992]或认知资源竞争[Wickens et al. 1983]来解释的。认知理论也为如何设计多模态人机交互提供了有价值的提示。继续上面的例子,有人建议某些多模式界面可以帮助用户减少他们的认知负荷,从而提高他们的表现。例如,手或笔手势的身体活动可以在组织和促进人们的空间信息处理方面发挥特别重要的作用,这已经被证明可以减少涉及几何、地图和类似领域的任务的认知负荷[Alibali et al. 2000, Oviatt 1997]。其他研究表明,表达功能强大的界面不仅有助于处理交互问题,而且通过充当“思考工具”,极大地促进了人类的认知[Oviatt 2013]。正是由于这些原因,“认知科学已经并将继续在指导多模态系统的设计中发挥重要作用”[Oviatt和Cohen 2015, p. 33]。认知解释的一种特别明确的形式是认知模型。一般来说,认知模型是为了理解或预测某种行为而对认知过程进行的简化的概要描述。认知建模是认知心理学、认知科学和人工智能的交叉领域,这种方法在认知建模领域得到了显著的发展。在这些领域,认知模型主要是在通用认知架构中开发的,如ACT-R [Anderson等人,2004]或SOAR [Laird, 2012],这是两个突出的例子,它们捕获了通常假设的人类思维的结构和功能特性。然而,术语认知模型并不局限于这种架构的使用。每当以计算术语提供基于模拟的检查和评估的认知或心理过程的特定概念时,都可以适当地使用它。这可能包括符号、混合、连接主义或动态模型[参见Polk和Seifert 2002],它已被提出用于单一认知任务(例如,记忆项目),用于两个或多个过程的交互(例如,视觉搜索和语言理解),或用于做出特定的行为预测(例如,视觉搜索和语言理解)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书