Generative modelling of dyadic conversations: characterization of pragmatic skills during development age

Authors:
Anna Pesarin;Monja Tait;Alessandro Vinciarelli;Cristina Segalin;Giovanni Bilancia;Marco Cristani
Affiliations:
University of Verona, Italy;Accademia di Neuropsicologia dello Sviluppo (A.N.Svi.), Parma, Italy;University of Glasgow, UK,Idiap Research Institute, Switzerland;University of Verona, Italy;Accademia di Neuropsicologia dello Sviluppo (A.N.Svi.), Parma, Italy;University of Verona, Italy,Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (IIT), Genova, Italy
Venue:
MPRSS'12 Proceedings of the First international conference on Multimodal Pattern Recognition of Social Signals in Human-Computer-Interaction
Year:
2012

Citing 5
Cited 0

Embodied conversational interface agents

Communications of the ACM
Pattern Classification (2nd Edition)

Pattern Classification (2nd Edition)
Social signals, their function, and automatic analysis: a survey

ICMI '08 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Multimodal interfaces
Generative modeling and classification of dialogs by a low-level turn-taking feature

Pattern Recognition
Automatic Intonation Recognition for the Prosodic Assessment of Language-Impaired Children

IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

This work investigates the effect of children age on pragmatic skills, i.e. on the way children participate in conversations, in particular when it comes to turn-management (who talks when and how much) and use of silences and pauses. The proposed approach combines the extraction of "Steady Conversational Periods" - time intervals during which the structure of a conversation is stable - with Observed Influence Models, Generative Score Spaces and feature selection strategies. The experiments involve 76 children split into two age groups: "pre-School" (3-4 years) and "School" (6-8 years). The statistical approach proposed in this work predicts the group each child belongs to with precision up to 85%. Furthermore, it identifies the pragmatic skills that better account for the difference between the two groups.