LV= also benefitted as a larger company. According to Hickman, “Over the (trial) period, the volume of calls from broker partners reduced by 91 per cent…that means is aLVin was able to provide a final answer in around 70 per cent of conversations with the user, and only 22 per cent of those conversations resulted in [needing] a chat with a real-life agent.”

Love them or hate them, chatbots are here to stay. Chatbots have become extraordinarily popular in recent years largely due to dramatic advancements in machine learning and other underlying technologies such as natural language processing. Today’s chatbots are smarter, more responsive, and more useful – and we’re likely to see even more of them in the coming years.
There are a bunch of e-commerce stores taking advantage of chatbots as well. One example that I was playing with was from Fynd that enables you to ask for specific products and they'll display them to you directly within Messenger. What's more, Facebook even allows you to make payments via Messenger bots, opening up a whole world of possibility to e-commerce stores.
aLVin is built on the foundation of Nuance’s Nina, the intelligent multichannel virtual assistant that leverages natural language understanding (NLU) and cognitive computing capabilities. aLVin interacts with brokers to better understand “intent” and deliver the right information 24/7; the chatbot was built with extensive knowledge of LV=Broker’s products, which accelerated the process of being able to answer more questions and direct brokers to the right products early on
Furthermore, major banks today are facing increasing pressure to remain competitive as challenger banks and fintech startups crowd the industry. As a result, these banks should consider implementing chatbots wherever human employees are performing basic and time-consuming tasks. This would cut down on salary and benefit costs, improve back-office efficiency, and deliver better customer care.
[In] artificial intelligence ... machines are made to behave in wondrous ways, often sufficient to dazzle even the most experienced observer. But once a particular program is unmasked, once its inner workings are explained ... its magic crumbles away; it stands revealed as a mere collection of procedures ... The observer says to himself "I could have written that". With that thought he moves the program in question from the shelf marked "intelligent", to that reserved for curios ... The object of this paper is to cause just such a re-evaluation of the program about to be "explained". Few programs ever needed it more.[8]
×