Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Calico 2014   intelligent call - def
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Calico 2014 intelligent call - def

155
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
155
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. CALICO 2014 Seven ways to make CALL more intelligent. Towards the effective integration of NLP techniques Piet Desmet in collaboration with Frederik Cornillie, Ruben Lagatie, Sien Moens, Maribel Montero Perez, Hans Paulussen & Serge Verlinde
  • 2. CALICO 2014 0. Introduction 0.1. Terminology Parser-based CALL (Holland et al. 1993) NLP-enhanced CALL (Nerbonne 2005) Intelligent CALL or iCALL “ICALL – Intelligent CALL – is a field within CALL which applies concepts, techniques, algorithms and technologies from AI to CALL (…). Most relevant to CALL is research in four branches of AI: (1) natural language processing, (2) user modelling, (3) expert systems and (4) intelligent tutoring systems”. (Schulze 2010: 65) -> progressively larger scope
  • 3. CALICO 2014 0.2. Challenges and opportunities Most of the CALL environments do not use NLP -> use of NLP in classrooms is hardly mainstream practice “The development of systems using NLP technology is not on the agenda of most CALL experts, and interdisciplinary research projects integrating computational linguists and foreign language teachers remain very rare” (Amaral & Meurers 2011: 6). cf. also report by the Dutch Language Union: Onderzoek taal- en spraaktechnologie en onderwijs (Van den Heuvel, T’Sas & Verberne 2012) Technological concerns Pedagogical concerns
  • 4. CALICO 2014 Technological concerns Can NLP account for the full complexity of natural human languages “I am pessimistic about the possibility of ICALL” (Nyns 1989: 46) + in educational settings, no room for erroneous analyses -> need for nearly error-free applications But: too limited accuracy of NLP-tools -> risk of mislearning of L2 http://www.flickr.com/photos/maphutha/1303854829/
  • 5. CALICO 2014 “It is therefore of the utmost importance to warn the users of the limitations of the tools. Ideally, inadequate outputs provided by the NLP tools should make the learners reflect even more on the language they are learning and on its structure. Therefore, even NLP tool errors should help the learners master the target language because they require more thinking on their part. Thus, NLP tools can be useful for CALL and usefully used in CALL. The present, imperfect state of technology should not be a hindrance, although there is obviously room for improvement. However, improvements are often triggered by remarks and studies on how tools effectively work in context. Thus, if one waits to see improvements before using NLP tools in CALL software, one might have to wait for a long time, while using the tools in their present state will encourage improvements to be made according to the needs of the language learners” (Vandeventer 2003 – Linguistik online 17 – Learning and Teaching (in) Computational Linguistics) -> users are intelligent and undemanding (BUT: for all language levels?) + ICALL stimulates reflective practice -> Perhaps the best is yet to come, but let’s choose not to wait…
  • 6. CALICO 2014 The Penrose impossible stairs Computerpower doubles every 2 years Technological progress vs Pedagogical progress! Pedagogical concerns
  • 7. CALICO 2014 Pedagogical concerns Initial NLP-enhanced CALL is mainly form-focused <-> Also ‘focus on meaning’ & meaning-based activities in Foreign language learning and teaching (FLLT) ICALL allows for the use of authentic materials and skills-oriented activities (cf. communicative approach) BUT: still appropriate task design needed in ICALL “From a computational perspective, a well-defined task design with its clear set of relevant language constructions facilitates the restriction to a linguistic domain which is ‘manageable’ for a system’s natural language processing modules” (Schulze 2010: 79) <-> In FLLT focus on authentic language tasks with fully open & unpredictable interaction in real life settings (cf. task-based language teaching) -> challenges for ICALL!
  • 8. CALICO 2014 0.3. Towards a typology (a) Linguistic perspective: type of language involved Written vs spoken, native vs learner language, etc. (b) Technological perspective: NLP & AI-technologies involved Parsing, NER, topic detection, sentiment mining, text summarization, etc. (c) Pedagogical perspective: type of learning activities involved Reception, production, interaction, mediation (d) CALL perspective: type of technology-based learning or teaching activities
  • 9. CALICO 2014 CALL perspective: type of technology-based learning or teaching activities From receptive to productive activities with focus on written language input & output 1. Input provider 2. Reading companion 3. Exercise and test generator 4. Error detector, feedback generator and automatic scoring tool 5. Writing aid 6. Adaptive item sequencer 7. Resource generator -> Conceptual outline + applications from academic R&D
  • 10. CALICO 2014 1. Input provider What? (Semi-)automated selection of comprehensible & authentic text material How? a. analysis of readability and formal complexity + syntactic and lexical text simplification/elaboration b. analysis of meaning or text categorization (e.g. subject categorization, topic detection, text categorization, etc.) Seven roles for ICALL applications
  • 11. CALICO 2014 a. Text retrieval on the basis of readability evaluation of input REAP-project (Carnegie Mellon) http://reap.cs.cmu.edu “Reader-Specific Lexical Practice for Improved Reading Comprehension”: support learners in searching for texts that are well-suited for providing vocabulary and reading practice. + analysis of formal complexity of input SATO-project (François Daoust) http://www.ling.uqam.ca/sato Système d’analyse de texte par ordinateur + SATO-Calibrage Automated formal analysis of a corpus (existing or personal)
  • 12. CALICO 2014 b. analysis of meaning & text categorization © Sien Moens (2009)
  • 13. CALICO 2014 2. Reading companion What? helping learners understand foreign-language input How? annotation layers, both formal and semantic GLOSSER-project (John Nerbonne) http://www.let.rug.nl/glosser/Glosser lemmatization of the inflected forms dictionary entry (cf. Van Dale) examples of the word from corpora iRead+ project (ITEC) Lemmatization & POS-tagging Named entity recognition (persons, organisations, locations)
  • 14. CALICO 2014 GLOSSER-project Lemmatization of inflected forms Dictionary entry (Van Dale) Examples from corpora
  • 15. CALICO 2014
  • 16. CALICO 2014 Vb Anderlecht Taalk. /3
  • 17. CALICO 2014
  • 18. CALICO 2014 3. Exercise and test generator What? (semi-)automated generation of exercise and test items How? based on the analysis of L1 text materials and/or on the analysis of learner errors - morpho-syntactical activities: iRead+ project (ITEC) VIEW-project (Detmar Meurers) http://sifnos.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/VIEW Visual Input Enhancement of the Web - lexical activities: Alfalex-project (Serge Verlinde) http://ilt.kuleuven.be/publicaties/tools.php - semantic activities: cf. Sien Moens - semantic frame labeling
  • 19. CALICO 2014 iRead+ Exercise generator: Three step model – Explore 1. Application highlights target items 2. Learner recognizes target items and clicks on target items – Practice • Fill gaps or multiple choice activities • Feedback – Play • Target items, drill & practice • Time constraint
  • 20. CALICO 2014
  • 21. CALICO 2014 Alfalex (KU Leuven – Serge Verlinde)
  • 22. CALICO 2014
  • 23. CALICO 2014 Semantic frame labeling© Sien Moens (2009)
  • 24. CALICO 2014 4. Error detector, feedback generator and automatic scoring tool What? Automated analysis of learner output and generation of feedback Not limited to closed exercises (MC, fill-in-the-blank, etc.) but also (semi-)open practice tasks (translation, correction, rephrasing, etc.) How? 1) Approximate (or fuzzy) string matching (ASM) -> anticipate all potential well-formed and ill-formed learner responses (with inclusion of regular expressions) 2) Parser-based (malrules, constraint relaxation, etc.) and/or statistical and machine learning methods
  • 25. CALICO 2014 0 5 10 15 20 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Numberofpublications Year Parser-based ICALL Statistical ICALL Looking at the number of publications shown in this figure, parser-based CALL has dominated research up until 2005, but there seems to have been a shift in research interest and statistical error detection systems have since then taken the upper hand. © PhD Ruben Lagatie
  • 26. CALICO 2014 BUT: fully open-ended learner output hard to manage -> constrain learner output (reduce possible answers) by reducing the search space of the processing tools How? ° task: structured towards specific type of output - require the learner to use certain language material e-tutor-project (Trude Heift) http://www.e-tutor.sfu.ca translation Tagarela-project (Detmar Meurers) http://sifnos.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/tagarela answer should include certain words - the task design offers clues towards a limited set of possible answers Dialog Dungeon (ITEC) gamified written dialog tasks ° correction: focus on specific set of problems (e.g. past tenses, subject-verb agreement, etc.)
  • 27. CALICO 2014 E-tutor project
  • 28. CALICO 2014 Tagarela-project
  • 29. CALICO 2014 ‘social’ log-in Dialog Dungeon gamified written dialogue tasks @Frederik Cornillie semi-open written exercise learning support: link to responses of peers
  • 30. CALICO 2014 learning support: responses of peers
  • 31. CALICO 2014 focused exercise on tenses
  • 32. CALICO 2014 ‘typical’ error
  • 33. CALICO 2014 contrastive analysis learner reponse – closest correct match (based on approximate string matching, POS tagging, lemmatization)
  • 34. CALICO 2014 supportive prompt with metalinguistic hints (based on POS tagging)
  • 35. CALICO 2014 5. Writing aid What? Support the learner in writing a functional, well-formed tekst How? No automated correction, but suggestions to help the learner improve himself his output Post-writing checks (or on-the-fly prompts) Assistance on lower-order skills (spelling) but also on lexical (including MWE), lexico-grammatical and grammatical skills Interactive Language Toolbox-project (Serge Verlinde) https://ilt.kuleuven.be/inlato Bon patron, SpellCheckPlus & SpanishChecker (Nadaclair Language Technologies) http://bonpatron.com; http://spellcheckplus.com; http://spanishchecker.com + semantic and pragmatic analysis Glosser-project (Univ. of Sydney) http://www.glosserproject.org/en/
  • 36. CALICO 2014 Interactive Language Toolbox
  • 37. CALICO 2014
  • 38. CALICO 2014
  • 39. CALICO 2014 Glosser project (Sydney)
  • 40. CALICO 2014 6. Adaptive item sequencer (a) Adaptivity: to what? - difficulty level of the tasks - learner profile (prior knowledge, motivation, cognitive load, interests & preferences) - context (time and place, device, etc.) (b) What to adapt? - adaptive form representation (form in which content is presented to the learner, e.g. dynamically generated hypermedia pages) - adaptive content representation (e.g. with or without learner support) - adaptive curriculum sequencing (e.g. selection of items in function of difficulty level, learner profile, etc.) (c) How to implement adaptivity? - full program control (via reasoning component ‘if.. then…’ rules) - full learner control - shared control Wauters, K., Desmet, P., Van Den Noortgate, W. (2010). Adaptive Item-Based Learning Environments Based on the Item Response Theory: Possibilities and Challenges. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26 (6), 549-562.
  • 41. CALICO 2014 What about AI? (a) Adaptivity: to what? - linguistic complexity -> language agent (expert system) - item difficulty -> IRT - learner profile (prior knowledge, motivation, cognitive load, interests & preferences) -> student agent (b) What to adapt? - adaptive curriculum sequencing (e.g. selection of items in function of difficulty level, learner profile, etc.) -> tutor agent (c) How to implement adaptivity? full or shared control -> tutor agent Beuls, Katrien (2013) Processing, learning and tutoring of Spanish verb morphology. Brussels: VUB. (PhD)
  • 42. CALICO 2014 7. Resource generator What? creating reference materials: concordancing on bilingual corpora REBECA-project (ITEC) Ressources électroniques bilingues extraites de corpus alignés & more advanced search engines DPC-project (ITEC) http://www.kuleuven-kulak.be/DPC/ Dutch Parallel Corpus corpus-enriched learner dictionaries & grammars BLF-project (Serge Verlinde) http://ilt.kuleuven.be/blf/ Base Lexicale du Français How? Annotation & exploitation of corpora For whom? (Intermediate or) advanced learners with well developed linguistic awareness
  • 43. CALICO 2014 REBECA-project
  • 44. CALICO 2014 DPC-project
  • 45. CALICO 201416 June 2012 45 Example: “en réalité” French-Dutch
  • 46. CALICO 201416 June 2012 46 Example: “en réalité” French - Dutch
  • 47. CALICO 2014 Extension: video search Exploitation of XML-based captions (transcriptions and translations) to render video selection more versatile and attractive: lemmas are time tags indexes which form reference points to video selections
  • 48. CALICO 2014 à 00:00:09.6800 a 00:00:24.8900|00:00:28.8400|00:00:59.9000|00:01:12.7000 alors 00:00:24.8900 assez 00:00:18.0300|00:00:31.9000 au 00:00:38.3000 aussi 00:00:38.3000 aux 00:00:09.6800|00:01:05.8100 bas 00:00:35.6500 beaucoup 00:00:24.8900|00:00:55.0000|00:00:59.9000 bonnes 00:00:31.9000 calais 00:00:51.1200 ce 00:01:05.8100 celle 00:00:42.0800 c’est 00:00:09.6800|00:00:24.8900 cette 00:00:06.6400|00:01:05.8100|00:01:12.7000 chefs 00:01:16.0000 chercher 00:00:18.0300|00:00:31.9000 chou 00:00:04.0000 choux 00:01:05.8100 club 00:01:16.0000 comme 00:00:06.6400 comment 00:00:18.0300 composer 00:00:42.0800 cuisine 00:00:04.0000|00:00:14.1800|00:01:12.7000 curiosité 00:00:38.3000 dans 00:00:18.0300|00:00:18.0300|00:00:24.8900|00:00:28.8400| 00:00:31.9000|00:00:35.6500|00:00:47.2800|00:01:16.0000|00:01:19.9500 Viewing video extracts based on lexical search in transcription and/or translation (challenge: search on semantically related words)
  • 49. CALICO 2014 Conclusion… Digital (learning) is the new normal a must trivial mainstream It’s not about technology. It’s about usage & added value! Usage: ICALL should enter our classrooms + be integrated into applications Added value: ICALL is a (potentially) powerful means to realise the main objective: improve learning -> qualified optimism about NLP-enhanced CALL

×