skip to main content
short-paper

Arabic Speech Act Recognition Techniques

Authors Info & Claims
Published:13 February 2018Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

This article presents rule-based and statistical-based techniques for Arabic speech act recognition. The proposed techniques classify an utterance into Arabic speech act categories based on three criteria: surface features, cue words, and contextual information. A rule-based expert system has been developed in a bootstrapping manner based on the fact that Arabic language syntax is inherently rule-based. Various machine-learning algorithms have been used to detect Arabic speech act categories: Decision Tree, Naïve Bayes, Neural Network, and SVM. We compare the experimental results for both techniques (machine-learning and rule-based expert systems). Using a corpus of 1,500 sentences, the rule-based expert system achieved an accuracy rate of 98.92%, while the Decision Tree, Naïve Bayes, Neural Network, and SVM achieved an accuracy rate of 97.09%, 96.48%, 93.50%, and 93.70%, respectively.

References

  1. S. Abdennadher, A. Aly, D. B¨uhler, W. Minker, and J. Pittermann. 2007. BECAM Tool - A semi-automatic tool for bootstrapping emotion corpus annotation and management. In European Conference on Speech and Language Processing (EUROSPEECH’07). 946--949.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. F. H. Al-Hindawi, H. H. Al-Masu'di, and R. F. Mirza. 2014. The speech act theory in english and arabic. Open J. Mod. Ling. 4, 1 (2014), 27--37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. J. Allen and M. Core. 1997. Draft of DAMSL: Dialog act markup in several layers. Technical Report, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. J. Austin. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. M. Boudchiche, A. Mazroui, M. A. Bebah, A. Lakhouaja, and A. Boudlal. 2017. AlKhalil Morpho Sys 2: A robust arabic morpho-syntactic analyzer, (2017) J. King Saud Univ. Comput. Inf. Sci. 29, 2 (2017), 141--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. W. S. Choi, J. M. Cho, and J. Seo. 1999. Analysis system of speech acts and discourse structures using maximum entropy model. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 230--237. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. S. B. Dbabis, F. Mallek, H. Ghorbel, and L. Belguith. 2012. Dialogue acts annotation scheme within arabic discussions. In Proceedings of the 16th Workshop on Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SemDial’12). 88--96.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. S. B. Dbabis, H. Ghorbel, L. H. Belguith, and M. Kallel. 2015. Automatic dialogue act annotation within arabic debates. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics (CICLing’15), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9041. 467--478.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. A. Elmadany, S. Abdou, and M. Gheith. 2014. Arabic inquiry-answer dialogue acts annotation schema. IOSR J. Eng. 04, 12 (Dec. 2014), 32--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. A. Elmadany, S. Abdou, and M. Gheith. 2015. Recent approached to arabic dialogue acts classification. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conferences on Natural Language Processing (NLP’15), Computer Science 8 Information Technology (CS 8 IT) Series, Vol. 5. 117--129.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. A. Elmadany, S. Abdou, and M. Gheith. 2015. Towards understanding egyptian arabic dialogues. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 120, 22 (June 2015), 7--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. A. Ezen-Can and K. E. Boyer. 2014. Combining task and dialogue streams in unsupervised dialogue act models. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGDIAL’14). 113--122.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Ezen-Can and K. E. Boyer. 2015a. Understanding student language: An unsupervised dialogue act classification approach. J. Educ. Data Mining 7, 1 (2015), 51--78.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. Ezen-Can and K. E. Boyer. 2015b. A tutorial dialogue system for real-time evaluation of unsupervised dialogue act classifiers: Exploring system outcomes. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED’15), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9112. 105--114.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. M. Fišel. 2007. Machine learning techniques in dialogue act recognition. Eston. Pap. Appl. Ling. 3 (2007), 117--134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. Hijjawi, Z. Bandar, and K. Crockett. 2013. User's utterance classification using machine learning for arabic conversational agents. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology (CSIT’13). 223--232.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. D. Jurafsky, E. Shriberg, and D. Biasca. 1997. Switchboard SWBD-DAMSL labeling project coder's manual, draft 13. Technical Report 97-02, University of Colorado Institute of Cognitive Science.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. D. Jurafsky, E. Shriberg, B. Fox, and T. Curl. 1998. Lexical, prosodic, and syntactic cues for dialog acts. In Proceedings of the ACL/COLING-98 Workshop on Discourse Relations and Discourse Markers. 114--120.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. S. Keizer, R. op den Akker, and A. Nijholt. 2002. Dialogue act recognition with bayesian networks for dutch dialogues. In Proceedings of the 3rd SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue. 88--94. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. A. Khoo, Y. Marom, and D. Albrecht. 2006. Experiments with sentence classification. In Proceedings of the 2006 Australasian Language Technology Workshop (ALTW2006). 18--25.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. H. Kim, C. N. Seon, and J. Seo. 2011. Review of korean speech act classification: machine learning methods. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. 5, 4 (Dec. 2011), 288--293.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. P. Král and C. Cerisara. 2014. Automatic dialogue act recognition with syntactic features. Lang. Resourc. Eval. 48, 3 (Sept. 2014), 419--441. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. J. W. Lee, G. C. Kim, and J. Seo. 1997. A dialogue analysis model with statistical speech act processing for dialogue machine translation. In Proceedings of Spoken Language Translation (Workshop in Conjunction with (E)ACL'97). 10--15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. M. Louwerse and S. Crossley. 2006. Dialog act classification using n-gram algorithms. In Proceedings of the Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society International Conference (FLAIRS’06). AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, 758--763.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. J. Marineau, P. Wiemer-Hastings, D. Harter, B. Olde, P. Chipman, A. Karnavat, V. Pomeroy, S. Rajan, and A. Graesser. 2000. The tutoring research group, classification of speech acts in tutorial dialog. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Modeling Human Teaching Tactics and Strategies at the Intelligent Tutoring Systems 2000 Conference, 2000, 65--71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. D. Milajevs and M. Purver. 2014. Investigating the contribution of distributional semantic information for dialogue act classification. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Continuous Vector Space Models and their Compositionality (CVSC’14). 40--47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. C. Moldovan, V. Rus, and A. C. Graesser. 2011. Automated speech act classification for online chat. In Proceedings of the 22nd Midwest Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science Conference. 23--29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. J. O'Shea, Z. Bandar, and K. Crockett. 2010. A machine learning approach to speech act classification using function words. In Proceedings of the 4th KES International Symposium (KES-AMSTA’10), Part II. Springer, 82--91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. S. Oraby, P. Gundecha, J. Mahmud, M. Bhuiyan, and R. Akkiraju. 2017. How may i help you?: Modeling twitter customer service conversations using fine-grained dialogue acts. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI'17). 343--355. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. T. Rasor, A. Olney, and S. D'Mello. 2011. Student speech act classification using machine learning. In Proceedings of the 24th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. V. Rus, N. Maharjan, and R. Banjade. 2017. Dialogue act classification in human-to-human tutorial dialogues. In Proceedings of Innovations in Smart Learning Conference, Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Springer, Singapore, 183--186.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. K. Sadohara, H. Kojima, T. Narita, M. Nihei, M. Kamata, S. Onaka, Y. Fujita, and T. Inoue. 2013. Sub-lexical dialogue act classification in a spoken dialogue system support for the elderly with cognitive disabilities. In Proceedings of 4th Workshop on Speech and Language Processing for Assistive Technologies (SLPAT’13). 93--98.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. D. Schabus, B. Krenn, and F. Neubarth. 2016. Data-driven identification of dialogue acts in chat messages. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Natural Language Processing (KONVENS’16). 236--241.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. L. Shala, V. Rus, and A. Graesser. 2010. Automatic speech act classification in arabic. In Proceedings of the Subjetividad y Procesos Cognitivos Conference. 284--292.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. L. Sherkawi, N. Ghneim, and O. Al Dakkak. 2017. Arabic speech act recognition using bootstrapped rule based system. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Netw. Computat. Intell. Data Analyt. 1, 1 (2017), 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. M. Sokolova and G. Lapalme. 2009. A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks. Inf. Process. Manage. J. 45, 4 (2009), 427--437. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. M. Tavafi, Y. Mehdad, S. Joty, G. Carenini, and R. Ng. 2013. Dialogue act recognition in synchronous and asynchronous conversations. In Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2013 Conference. 117--121.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. E. Zarisheva and T. Scheffler. 2015. Dialog act annotation for twitter conversations. In Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2015 Conference. 114--123.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. R. Zhang, D. Gao, and W. Li. 2011. What are tweeters doing: Recognizing speech acts in twitter. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Analyzing Microtext at the 25th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence/ 86--91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Y. Zhou, Q. Hu, J. Liu, and Y. Jia. 2015. Combining heterogeneous deep neural networks with conditional random fields for Chinese dialogue act recognition. Neurocomputing, 168, C (Nov. 2015), 408--417. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Arabic Speech Act Recognition Techniques

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!