continually improving grounded natural language
play

Continually Improving Grounded Natural Language Understanding - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Continually Improving Grounded Natural Language Understanding through Human-Robot Dialog Jesse Thomason University of Texas at Austin Ph.D. Defense Human-Robot Dialog 2 Human-Robot Dialog alert me if her heart rate decreases bring


  1. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’16] Technical Contributions ● Ensemble SVMs over multi-modal squishy object features to perform press haptic language grounding . ● Get language labels from natural language game with human users 49

  2. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’16] 50

  3. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’16] Experiments Playing I Spy vs multi-modal vision only 51

  4. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’16] Experiments Playing I Spy Four folds of objects for four rounds of training. 52

  5. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’16] Problematic I Spy Object Future : Be mindful of object novelty both for the learning algorithm and for human users. 53

  6. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’16] Polysemy Induction and Synonymy Detection (IJCAI’17) NLP Robotics Papers Human- before Robot proposal Dialog Improving Learning Semantic Parsing Groundings with through Dialog Human Interaction (IJCAI’15) (IJCAI’16) Dialog 54

  7. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’17] Polysemy Induction and Synonymy Detection NLP Robotics Papers Human- before Robot proposal Dialog Improving Learning Semantic Parsing Groundings with through Dialog Human Interaction (IJCAI’15) (IJCAI’16) Dialog 55

  8. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’17] Unsupervised Word Synset Induction “chinese grapefruit” “kiwi” “kiwi vine” 56

  9. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’17] Unsupervised Word Synset Induction “kiwi”, “chinese grapefruit”, “kiwi vine” “kiwi” “kiwi” 57

  10. [Thomason et al., IJCAI’17] Polysemy Induction and Synonymy Detection NLP Robotics Papers Human- before Robot proposal Dialog Improving Learning Semantic Parsing Groundings with through Dialog Human Interaction (IJCAI’15) (IJCAI’16) Dialog 58

  11. Faster Object Exploration for Grounding (AAAI’18) NLP Robotics Papers Human- since Jointly Improving Robot Parsing & Perception proposal Dialog ( in submission ) Learning Groundings with Opportunistic Active Learning (CoRL’17) Dialog 59

  12. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Faster Object Exploration for Grounding (AAAI’18) NLP Robotics Papers Human- since Jointly Improving Robot Parsing & Perception proposal Dialog ( in submission ) Learning Groundings with Opportunistic Active Learning (CoRL’17) Dialog 60

  13. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Exploratory Behaviors 104s to explore an object once. +hold (5.7s) 520s to explore an object five times. +look 4.5 hours to (0.8s) fully explore 32 objects. 61

  14. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Guiding Exploratory Behaviors rigid: squishy? press press? haptic look look? VGG 62

  15. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Guiding Exploratory Behaviors rigid: squishy press press haptic haptic look look VGG VGG 63

  16. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18; Mikolov et al., NIPS’13] Guiding Exploratory Behaviors d2 tall similarity(rigid, squishy) = cos ( � ) rigid squishy � mug d1 64

  17. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Shared Structure: Embeddings and Features 2D-projection of 2D-projection of word embeddings behavior context features 65

  18. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Guiding Exploratory Behaviors using Embeddings Surrogate reliability Nearest Reliability weights for weights for new word-embedding trained neighbor classifiers for q predicates to q classifiers p 66

  19. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Technical Contributions ● Reduce exploration time when learning a target new word . ● Use word embeddings and human annotations to guide behaviors. 67

  20. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Results Color predicates Weight predicates Contents predicates Agreement with Gold Number of Behaviors Number of Behaviors Number of Behaviors (dotted lines show standard error) 68

  21. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Other Findings ● Human annotations help; grasp lift on held lifted “how would you tell if an table drop lower object is tall ?” look hold press push ● Human annotations + word embeddings work better than either alone. 69

  22. [Thomason et al., AAAI’18] Faster Object Exploration for Grounding (AAAI’18) NLP Robotics Papers Human- since Jointly Improving Robot Parsing & Perception proposal Dialog ( in submission ) Learning Groundings with Opportunistic Active Learning (CoRL’17) Dialog 70

  23. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Faster Object Exploration for Grounding (AAAI’18) NLP Robotics Papers Human- since Jointly Improving Robot Parsing & Perception proposal Dialog ( in submisison ) Learning Groundings with Opportunistic Active Learning Dialog 71

  24. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Active Learning for Perceptual Questions The object for which the predicate classifier is least sure of the predicted label. d( bottle , ) = 0.8 d( bottle , ) = -0.6 d( bottle , ) = 0.4 d( bottle , ) = -0.2 72

  25. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Active Learning for Perceptual Questions empty bottle sensorimotor sensorimotor w p,c w p,c context context lift-haptics ? look-shape 0.6 lift-audio ? look-vgg 0.5 ... ... ... ... look-vgg ? lower-haptics 0.02 73

  26. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Active Learning for Perceptual Questions Ask for a label with probability proportional to un confidence in least confident training object. Ask for a positive label for any predicate we have insufficient data for. 74

  27. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Active Learning for Perceptual Questions Ask for a label with “Could you use the probability proportional to word bottle when un confidence in least describing this object?” confident training object. Ask for a positive label for “Can you show me any predicate we have something empty?” insufficient data for. 75

  28. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] 76

  29. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Technical Contributions “A full, yellow bottle.” ● Introduce an opportunistic active learning strategy for “Would you getting high-value labels. describe this object as full?” ● Show that off-topic questions “Show me something red.” improve performance. 77

  30. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Experiments with Object Identification “Would you “Show me vs describe this something red.” object as full?” Baseline Agent Inquisitive Agent 78

  31. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Results “Would you Baseline Agent describe this Rated less annoying. object as full?” Inquisitive Agent “Show me something red.” Correct object more often. Rated better for real-world use. 79

  32. [Thomason et al., CoRL’17] Faster Object Exploration for Grounding (AAAI’18) NLP Robotics Papers Human- since Jointly Improving Robot Parsing & Perception proposal Dialog ( in submission ) Learning Groundings with Opportunistic Active Learning Dialog 80

  33. [ in submission ] Faster Object Exploration for Grounding (AAAI’18) NLP Robotics Papers Human- Jointly Improving since Robot Parsing & proposal Perception Dialog ( in submission ) Learning Groundings with Opportunistic Active Learning (CoRL’17) Dialog 81

  34. Human-Robot Dialog Natural Language Perception Understanding Models Utterance Annotated Semantic User World Parser Knowledge Robot Meaning Behavior Question Agent Belief Dialog Dialog Policy Agent 82

  35. [ in submission ] Jointly Improving Parsing and Perception “Move a rattling container from lounge by the conference room to Bob’s office.” 83

  36. [ in submission ] Experiments via Amazon Mechanical Turk Training x 113 Object / Induced Predicate Training Pairs Labels Semantic Perception Parser Models 84

  37. [ in submission ] Experiments via Amazon Mechanical Turk Testing - Baseline x ~45 Semantic Perception Parser Models 85

  38. [ in submission ] Experiments via Amazon Mechanical Turk Testing - Perception x ~45 Object / Predicate Labels Semantic Perception Perception Parser Models Models 86

  39. [ in submission ] Getting Object/Predicate Labels in Dialog Object / Predicate Labels Perception Models 87

  40. [ in submission ] Getting Object/Predicate Labels in Dialog Object / Predicate Labels Perception Models 88

  41. [ in submission ] Experiments via Amazon Mechanical Turk Testing - Parsing + Perception x ~45 Object / Induced Predicate Training Pairs Labels Semantic Perception Perception Parser Models Models 89

  42. [ in submission ] Inducing New Training Examples from Dialog Induced Training Pairs Semantic Parser 90

  43. [ in submission ] Inducing New Training Examples from Dialog Expect whole command Expect goal task : navigate goal : room_3 91

  44. [ in submission ] Inducing New Training Examples from Dialog Induced Utterance/Denotation Pairs “go to the middle lab” navigate(room_3) “the lab in the middle” room_3 92

  45. [ in submission ] Natural Language Understanding Natural Language Understanding Perception “the lab in the Models room_3 middle” Semantic Parser Annotated World Knowledge something that is a lab room_3, room_7, ... something that is both a lab and is central room_3 something that is central room_3, room_1, ... ... ... 93

  46. [ in submission ] Inducing New Training Examples from Dialog Induced Induced Parser Semantic Utterance/Denotation Training Data Parser Pairs “go to the middle lab” Perception “go to the middle lab” navigate(lab+central ) Models navigate(room_3) “the lab in the middle” “the lab in the middle” Annotated lab+central room_3 World Knowledge 94

  47. [Mikolov et al., NIPS’13; in submission ] Using Embeddings for Out-of-Vocabulary Words Induced Training Pairs task : deliver item : coffee “deliver “deliver person : bob java to bob” java to bob” Word Semantic Embeddings Parser “deliver” -> “bring” “java” -> “coffee” 95

  48. [Mikolov et al., NIPS’13; in submission ] Using Embeddings to Find Perception Words d2 white tall tower long � d1 96

  49. [ in submission ] Technical Contributions Induced Object / Training Predicate Pairs Labels ● Improve both parsing and perception from conversations. Semantic Perception Parser Models d2 white ● Use word embeddings to guide tall search for synonyms and tower long novel perceptual predicates . 97 d1

  50. [ in submission ] Experiments via Amazon Mechanical Turk Parsing + Untrained Baseline Perception Training Perception Training Object / Induced Object / Predicate Training Predicate Labels Pairs Labels Semantic Perception Semantic Perception Semantic Perception Parser Models Parser Models Parser Models 98

  51. [ in submission ] Metric - Semantic F1 99

  52. [ in submission ] Results - Navigation Task Quantitative - Semantic F1 Qualitative - Usability Rating 100

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend