Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T19:06:20.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ADD+: Including rhetorical structures in active documents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Ana Cristina Bicharra Garcia  and
Clarisse Sieckenius De Souz
Ana Cristina Bicharra Garcia
Affiliation:
Departamento de Ciência da Computaçāo, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Praça do Valonguinho s/n, Niterói, RJ—Brasil
Clarisse Sieckenius De Souz
Affiliation:
Departamento de Informática, Pontifícia Universidade Católica—RJ, Rua Marquês de São de São Vicente 225, Rio de Janeiro, RJ—Brasil
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A design is a plan containing guidelines to build and understand an artifact. Generally, this plan is constructed by a team of designers with different tasks, but sharing a common objective, that is, to create a high-quality, low-cost integrated artifact. Active Design Documents (ADDs) are powerful tools for cooperative design because they account for revealing the rationale among design participants while assisting each of them in their own. Design rationale capture and retrieval are critical issues on building documentation assistant tools. In this paper, we propose to achieve more efficient and effective delivery of design and designers intent by resorting to rhetorical means. The wealth of knowledge kept in ADD’s knowledge bases is organized into high-level Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) schema and mapped onto input and output screen configurations that gear the interaction between systems and users. We illustrate the effects of such an organization with evidences from an implemented version of ADD for the domain of offshore platform.

Keywords

Design RationaleRSTRhetorical StructuringActive DocumentsNatural Language Explanations
Type
Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , April 1997 , pp. 109 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

ADDPROC, (1996). Final Project Report, CENPES, PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Google Scholar
ADDVAC, (1995). Final Project Report, CENPES, PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Google Scholar
Baudin, C, Sivard, C, & Zweben, M. (1990). Recovering rationale for design changes: A knowledge-based approach. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 745–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, J., & Begeman, M.L. (1988). gIBIS: A hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. Proc. 1988 Conf. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW-88), pp. 140–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, J., & Burgess-Yakemovic, K. (1996). A process-oriented approach to design rationale. In Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques, and Use, (Moran, T.P., & Carroll, J.M., Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
Cunha, C.K.V., & de Souza, C.S. (1996). The role of explanation systems in multi-agent applications. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
de Souza, C.S. (1993). The semiotic engineering of user interface languages. Int. J. Man-Machine Stud. 39, 753–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Souza, C.S., & Garcia, A.C.B. (1994). Towards a rhetoric of design documents. Proc. XI Brazilian Symposium on Artif. Intell. pp. 523–534.Google Scholar
Dong, A., & Agogino, A.M. (1996). Text analysis for constructing design representations. In Artificial Intelligence in Design ’96, (Gero, J.S., & Sudweeks, F., Eds.), Kluwer Academics Publishers, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Fischer, G., McCall, R., & Morch, A. (1989). JANUS: Integrating hypertext with knowledge-based design. Proc. Hypertext ’89, pp. 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia, A.C.B. (1992). Active design documents: A new approach for supporting documentation in preliminary routine design. Ph.D. thesis, civil engineering department, Stanford University, CA.Google Scholar
Garcia, A.C.B., & Vivacqua, A.S. (1996). The use of active documents to assist conflict mitigation in concurrent engineering. Proc. Int. Conf. Current Eng. (To be published).Google Scholar
Garcia, A.C.B., Andrade, J.C., Ferreira, R., & deMoura, R. (1996). ADDVAC: Applying active design documents to the capture, retrieval and use of rationale during offshore platform VAC design. Int. Conf. Knowledge Based Computer Systems. (Submitted).Google Scholar
Goel, A., Garza, A.G.S., Grué, N., Murdock, J.W., & Recker, M. (1996). In Artificial Intelligence in Design ’96, (Gero, J.S., & Sudweeks, F., Eds.), Kluwer Academics Publishers, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Gruber, T.R., & Russel, D.M. (1996). Generative design rationale; Beyond the record and replay paradigm. In Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques, and Use, (Moran, T.P., & Carroll, J.M., Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
Hovy, E. (1990). Unresolved issues in paragraph planning. In Current Research in Natural Language Generation, (Dale, R., Mellish, C, & Zock, M., Eds.), pp. 17–46. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Hovy, E. (1993). Automated discourse generation using discourse structure relations. Artif. Intell. 63(1–2), 341–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunz, W., & Rittel, H.W.J. (1970). Issues as elements of information systems (working paper No. 131). University of California, Berkeley, Center for Planning and Development Research, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Lee, J., & Lai, K.Y. (1991). What’s in design rationale? Human-Computer Interaction 6, 251–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackeown, K.R. (1985). Text generation: Using discourse strategies and focus constraints to generate natural language text. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacLean, A., Young, R.M.Bellotti, V.M.E., & Moran, T.P. (1991). Questions, options and criteria: Elements of design space analysis. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 6, 201–250.Google Scholar
Mann, W.C., & Thompson, S.A. (1987). Rhetorical structure theory: A theory of text organization. Technical Report ISI/RS–87–190. Information Science Institute.Google Scholar
McCall, R., Bennett, P., d’Oronzio, P., Ostwald, J., Shipman, F., & Wallace, N. (1990). PHIDIAS: A PHI-based design environment integrating CAD graphics into dynamic hypertext. In Hypertext: Concepts, Systems and Applications, (Rizk, A., Streitz, N., & Andre, J., Eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
Moore, J.D., & Paris, C.L. (1993). Planning text for advisory dialogue: Capturing intentional and rhetorical information. Computational Linguistics 19(4), 651–694.Google Scholar
Moore, J.D., & Swartout, W.R. (1993). A reactive approach to explanation taking the user’s feedback into account. In Natural Language Generation in Artificial Intelligence and Computational Linguistics, (Paris, C.L., Swartout, W.R., & Mann, W.C., Eds.). Kluwer Academics Publishers, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Oliveira, D.A.S., de Souza, C.S., & Haeusler, E.H. (1996). Structured argument generation in a logic-based KB system. Proc. of the Second Conf. Inf. Theoretic Approaches to Logic, Language, and Computation.Google Scholar
Olson, G.M., Olson, J.S., Storrosten, M., Carter, M., Herbsleb, J., & Rueter, H. (1996). The structure of activity during design meetings. In Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques, and Use, (Moran, P., & Carroll, J.M., Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
Scott, D.R., & de Souza, C.S. (1990). Getting the message across in RST-based text generation. In Current Research in Natural Language Generation, (Dale, R., Mellish, C., & Zock, M., Eds.). Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Shum, S.B. (1996). Analyzing the usability of design rationale notation. In Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques, and Use, (Moran, T.P., & Carroll, J.M., Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar