Die meisten Chatbots greifen auf eine vorgefertigte Datenbank, die sog. Wissensdatenbank mit Antworten und Erkennungsmustern, zurück. Das Programm zerlegt die eingegebene Frage zuerst in Einzelteile und verarbeitet diese nach vorgegebenen Regeln. Dabei können Schreibweisen harmonisiert (Groß- und Kleinschreibung, Umlaute etc.), Satzzeichen interpretiert und Tippfehler ausgeglichen werden (Preprocessing). Im zweiten Schritt erfolgt dann die eigentliche Erkennung der Frage. Diese wird üblicherweise über Erkennungsmuster gelöst, manche Chatbots erlauben darüber hinaus die Verschachtelung verschiedener Mustererkennungen über sogenannte Makros. Wird eine zur Frage passende Antwort erkannt, kann diese noch angepasst werden (beispielsweise können skriptgesteuert berechnete Daten eingefügt werden – „In Ulm sind es heute 37 °C.“). Diesen Vorgang nennt man Postprocessing. Die daraus entstandene Antwort wird dann ausgegeben. Moderne kommerzielle Chatbot-Programme erlauben darüber hinaus den direkten Zugriff auf die gesamte Verarbeitung über eingebaute Skriptsprachen und Programmierschnittstellen.


With competitor Venmo already established, peer-to-peer payments is not in and of itself a compelling feature for Snapchat. However, adding wallet functionality and payment methods to the app does lay the groundwork for Snapchat to delve directly into commerce. The messaging app’s commerce strategy became more clear in April 2016 with its launch of shoppable stories with select partners in its Discover section. For the first time, while viewing video stories from Target and Lancome, users were able to “swipe up” to visit an e-commerce page embedded within the Snapchat app where they could purchase products from those partners.
Web site: From Russia With Love. PDF. 2007-12-09. Psychologist and Scientific American: Mind contributing editor Robert Epstein reports how he was initially fooled by a chatterbot posing as an attractive girl in a personal ad he answered on a dating website. In the ad, the girl portrayed herself as being in Southern California and then soon revealed, in poor English, that she was actually in Russia. He became suspicious after a couple of months of email exchanges, sent her an email test of gibberish, and she still replied in general terms. The dating website is not named. Scientific American: Mind, October–November 2007, page 16–17, "From Russia With Love: How I got fooled (and somewhat humiliated) by a computer". Also available online.
Malicious chatbots are frequently used to fill chat rooms with spam and advertisements, by mimicking human behaviour and conversations or to entice people into revealing personal information, such as bank account numbers. They are commonly found on Yahoo! Messenger, Windows Live Messenger, AOL Instant Messenger and other instant messaging protocols. There has also been a published report of a chatbot used in a fake personal ad on a dating service's website.[44]
A chatbot works in a couple of ways: set guidelines and machine learning. A chatbot that functions with a set of guidelines in place is limited in its conversation. It can only respond to a set number of requests and vocabulary, and is only as intelligent as its programming code. An example of a limited bot is an automated banking bot that asks the caller some questions to understand what the caller wants done. The bot would make a command like “Please tell me what I can do for you by saying account balances, account transfer, or bill payment.” If the customer responds with "credit card balance," the bot would not understand the request and would proceed to either repeat the command or transfer the caller to a human assistant.
Through Knowledge Graph, Google search has already become amazingly good at understanding the context and meaning of your queries, and it is getting better at natural language queries. With its massive scale in data and years of working at the very hard problems of natural language processing, the company has a clear path to making Allo’s conversational commerce capabilities second to none.
Pop-culture references to Skynet and a forthcoming “war against the machines” are perhaps a little too common in articles about AI (including this one and Larry’s post about Google’s RankBrain tech), but they do raise somewhat uncomfortable questions about the unexpected side of developing increasingly sophisticated AI constructs – including seemingly harmless chatbots.
More and more businesses are choosing AI chatbots as part of their customer service team. There are several reasons for that. Chatbots can answer customers’ inquiries cheaply, quickly, in real-time. Another reason is the ease of installation of such chatbot: once you have a fine live chat app, it takes a couple of minutes to integrate a chatbot with it.
The biggest benefit of having a conversational AI solution is the instant response rate. Answering queries within an hour translates into 7X increase in the likelihood of converting a lead. Customers are more likely to talk about a negative experience than a positive one. So nipping a negative review right in the bud is going to help improve your product’s brand standing.
This kind of thinking has lead me to develop a bot where the focus is as a medium for content rather than a subsitute for intelligence. So users create content much as conventional author, (but with text stored in spreadsheets rather than anywhere else). Very little is expected from the bot in terms of human behavious such as “learning”, “empathy”, “memory” and character”. Does it work?
ELIZA's key method of operation (copied by chatbot designers ever since) involves the recognition of clue words or phrases in the input, and the output of corresponding pre-prepared or pre-programmed responses that can move the conversation forward in an apparently meaningful way (e.g. by responding to any input that contains the word 'MOTHER' with 'TELL ME MORE ABOUT YOUR FAMILY').[9] Thus an illusion of understanding is generated, even though the processing involved has been merely superficial. ELIZA showed that such an illusion is surprisingly easy to generate, because human judges are so ready to give the benefit of the doubt when conversational responses are capable of being interpreted as "intelligent".
×