Using AI To Identify Innuendo 86
angry tapir writes "Turning seemingly normal comments into sexual innuendo by adding the words 'That's what she said' is a cultural phenomenon. This has led some to wonder whether it is possible to determine when it is appropriate to add those magic four words to a sentence. As it turns out, identifying humor through software is hard. Two researchers at the University of Washington, however, were willing to give it their best shot. In a recently released paper entitled 'That's What She Said: Double Entendre Identification,' the researchers describe what they've found and introduce their new approach to the problem: 'Double Entendre via Noun Transfer' or DEviaNT for short." It's good to know that someone is trying to make sure the human race gets a sufficiently lewd AI one day.
Re: (Score:2)
"Two researchers at the University of Washington, however, were willing to give it their best shot" - That was she said!
She said that was?
In your haste, you fat-fingered the first post.
Re: (Score:2)
Jerk chicken or pulled pork?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Came for this; leaving satisfied...
That's what she said!
Re: (Score:1)
Flip them an Angry Bird.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I honestly don't have a single clue what you just said.
They could call it, (Score:2)
Re:HARLOT (Score:2)
With Chops to David Gerrold
HARLOT
Horny-Analog Realistic Lexigraphic Ontological Tabulator
Re: (Score:3)
Funny, I read that as
"HARLOT
Horny-Analog Realistic Lexigraphic Ornithological Tabulator"
and thought, "Hmmm, yeah, tits! [wikipedia.org]"
Gratuitous acronyms don't google well (Score:2)
In these days it pays to find a unique name for your project.
You need to qualify a search with other words if you want to google an acronym that makes a common word. Finding which extra words to use in your search is a complicating factor and you are sure to miss many pages.
When I create a new project, the first step is to google each name I come up with until I find one that returns no google results.
Innuendo... (Score:3, Funny)
...isn't that a brand of suppository?
I would bet.. (Score:2)
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder (Score:2)
Would it label something straightforward as innuendo? For example, would the phrase "Let's have sex" be identified as having a double meaning, or would this system be able to tell that it means exactly what it says?
Re: (Score:3)
I RTFP (and not just TFA!), and they say they left that part (recognizing erotic context of the uttered sentence) for future work.
Re: (Score:1)
would this system be able to tell that it means exactly what it says?
Well, it'll never know if it doesn't try.
And a slap doesn't hurt a machine.
Ignoble Research (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Or you might want to add automatic "that's what she said" on the screen on tv shows. Having non-vocal "editorial" comments is very common in some program (mainly from extreme asia).
Great! (Score:4, Funny)
Next they should invent a sarcasm detector, that would be really useful.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Next they should invent a sarcasm detector, that would be really useful.
Yeah... that would be reallllllly useful...
Re: (Score:2)
That's what she said!
No wait, that doesn't work in context. Dammit, I need some AI to help me with my jokes.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think this is really needed. I for my part have no problems detecting sarcasm.
Now an algorithm that can detect when someone "has been whoooshed", as they say here in their juvenile jargon, that might be useful for automatizing the "whoosh" replies on /.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/business-brains/new-algorithm-spots-sarcasm-in-customer-testimonials/7192 [smartplanet.com]
Also, you might laugh, but one of the Program Committee Chairs at the conference this was accepted at [acl2011.org] has a bunch of work on computational humor: http://www.cse.unt.edu/~rada/papers.html [unt.edu]
Chatterbots (Score:2)
Me: Would you rather be a tuna or an elephant and why?
JW: I would much rather be a bee, and make honey for my queen.
Me: Okay but if 'bee' weren't one of the options.
JW: What does gender
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like the script for your average US situational comedy to me. But then i fear the AI from the article may well outperform me on the innuendo part (one aspect of being a aspie i guess).
Re: (Score:2)
T.W.A.T.S.S. (Score:3)
Simple algorithm (Score:2)
If "that's what she said" doesn't work, "giggidy" probably does.
I'd like to introduce a new approach (Score:2)
to your problem (if you know what I'm talking about)
Innuendo (Score:1)
As it turns out, identifying humor through software is hard.
That's what she said.
Poppycock (Score:1)
Why don't the authors of this research scrape all the comments here and see if it recognizes any of the heavy breathing wordplay?
you don't say (wink wink, nudge nudge) (Score:2)
that is all.
Uhhhh .... (Score:2)
Am I reading the Onion?
I mean ... that's just bizarre!!
And, really, until it can master all of the places where you can use "said the actress|bishop to the bishop|actress", it will always be incomplete. =)
Now, if you can make a computer program that can follow innue
Re: (Score:1)
I mean, the fucking use of the word fuck is in and of itself a fucking difficult thing for the fuckers to fucking figure out -- until then, they're pretty much fucked. Try hard enough, and you can make fuck into every single fucking part of speech, except maybe for those fucked up articles.
Absofuckinglutely.
I imagine it cannot be a simple task for any NLP to determine when the word fucking is mere fluff in a sentence, and when it is necessary to convey the meaning, and when it is necessary, WTF it stands for.
(I know this is not very original, but I felt your post on the matter at hand was too short and could do with some enhancements. Not that the length of a post says anything about its qualities, really; short ones can be more satisfying than the longest rant if done expertly. What I mea
Re: (Score:2)
I lul'd much, but I have no mod points.
Anything can be an innendo (Score:2)
"Turning seemingly normal comments into sexual innuendo by adding the words 'That's what she said' is a cultural phenomenon. (If you know what I mean) This has led some to wonder whether it is possible to determine when it is appropriate to add those magic four words to a sentence. As it turns out, identifying humor through software is hard. (That's what she said) Two researchers at the University of Washington, however, were willing to give it their best shot. (Yeah, I bet they are) In a recently released paper entitled 'That's What She Said: Double Entendre Identification,' the researchers describe what they've found and introduce their new approach to the problem (I'll approach your problem!): 'Double Entendre via Noun Transfer' or DEviaNT for short. (heh, short? *snicker*)"
Re: (Score:2)
"â¦and this is something that is difficult to implement in software." â" but a hardware implement will get the job done.
Say no more (Score:2)
An interesting idea... (Score:2)
...but let me know when it can play a game of Ar tonelico.
Sure (Score:2)
I for one... (Score:2)
I hear they overclock when you play Yakkety Sax-- and you can tell them, that's what I said!
Geeks rejoice! (Score:2)
Maybe we'll have an app for that soon so we can finally supplement out flirting techniques.
Waste of effort (Score:2)
They should just have asked Geoff Peterson. He's got it figured out. In your pants.
i'm all over it (Score:2)
I'm near Seattle in the moment, and TFA cites a presentation in Portland in June. I may just have
On a more serious note... (Score:2)
Not to get too off topic by being serious, but I'm wondering if it is even possible to detect humor just from the expression.
Even with "that's what she said" there is an element of unpredictability that can only be tested when executed. I mean, sometimes it's not funny. In other words, the only test is if someone reads it and laughs.
This is much like not being able to predict the outcome of code completely without executing it.
We can always record results and rely on statistical analysis, but finding answer
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)