English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Today's artificial assistants are typically prompted to perform tasks throughdirect, imperative commands such as \emph{Set a timer} or \emph{Pick up thebox}. However, to progress toward more natural exchanges between humans andthese assistants, it is important to understand the way non-imperativeutterances can indirectly elicit action of an addressee. In this paper, weinvestigate command types in the setting of a grounded, collaborative game. Wefocus on a less understood family of utterances for eliciting agent action,locatives like \emph{The chair is in the other room}, and demonstrate how theseutterances indirectly command in specific game state contexts. Our work showsthat models with domain-specific grounding can effectively realize thepragmatic reasoning that is necessary for more robust natural languageinteraction.

The Pragmatics of Indirect Commands in Collaborative Discourse