<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="W02-0226">
  <Title>Bridging the Gap Between Dialogue Management and Dialogue Models</Title>
  <Section position="6" start_page="11" end_page="11" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
5 Conclusions
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> After a survey of the main approaches to dialogue modeling and dialogue management in working SDSs, we find the causes behind the gap between practical dialogue management and dialogue models and propose GDM, which consists of five ranks of discourse units and three levels of dialogue dynamics. It promises to bridge the gap through integrating meso-dynamics at the group level with macro-dynamics at the task level, and modeling interaction patterns via utterance groups using UT-3.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> Then we apply it to information-seeking dialogues and elaborate utterance groups (or interaction patterns) in the model. We also classify and segment utterance groups in our information-seeking corpus, which takes a preliminary step toward better dialogue modeling for practical dialogue management with empirical justification. A more challenging task - group pattern recognition - is under way (Xu, 2002). After that we will investigate how local discourse structure in terms of utterance group structure could contribute to the recognition of dialogue act (UT-2).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> GDM takes a step further toward better dialogue modeling for practical dialogue management with empirical justification. It is expected to be used in practical dialogue management in the near future for better usability and portability.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>