{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02689075630252101, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01680672268907563, 'mean_word_length': 5.208333333333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Foundations of Language Interaction HANDOUT SEVEN July 19 , 2001

There has been some limited work on representing computational problems directly in these terms, such as [Koller and Pfeffer, 1997]. A solution is an equilibrium—a strategy for each participant where the play of each can’t be improved if the other plays the strategy. (A wrinkle is that coordination problems typically have multiple equilibria, so players must know what equilibrium to play.) However, practical dialogue research has backed off from these models, which require a lot of parameters and quickly become intractable.