<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="A00-3003">
  <Title>Generating Text with a Theorem Prover</Title>
  <Section position="2" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1 Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Producing technical documentation is a time-consuming and expensive task. For instance, Reiter et al. (1995), report cases of engineers expending five hours on documentation for each hour spent on design and of airplane documentation sets which weigh more than the actual airplane being documented. Part of the reason for this problem is the gap between Computer Aided Design (CAD) tools and similar tools for assisting the documentation of those designs. Since research efforts focus primarily in the former, this situation is likely to get worse as the CAD tools get more powerful while documentation tools lag far behind.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> In this paper we address the matter of automatic generation of technical documentation (Reiter et al., 1992; Reiter et al., 1995; RSsner and Stede, 1992; Svenberg, 1994; Punshon et al., 1997) by studying the problem of automatically generating documents describing the single step transition behavior of Statecharts. null From a natural language generation (NLG) per- null spective, this problem is distinguished in that the formal correctness of the document being generated is crucial while felicitousness of the style is relatively unimportant. This leads us to a solution based on formally verifiable theorem-proving techniques which allows us to approach strategic NLG issues within a highly abstract and conceptually clear framework.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> The system takes a statechart in the form of a labeled directed graph and translates it into a set of propositional formulae defining its transition behavior. A hyper-text natural language document is generated on-demand from this set of formulae in response to the reader's interaction with the application. null Figure 1 depicts a comparative (Moore and Paris, 1993; Paris et al., 1991; Hovy, 1988) conceptual view of the system while Fig. 2 shows the system architecture. A prototype has been fully implemented with the exception of the statechart axiomatization module, x</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>