AllAgriculture (24) AI & ML (142) AR, VR, & MR (65) Asset Tracking (53) Blockchain (21) Building Automation (38) Connectivity (148) Bluetooth (12) Cellular (38) LPWAN (38) Data & Analytics (131) Devices & Sensors (174) Digital Transformation (189) Edge & Cloud Computing (54) Energy & Utilities (42) Finance & Insurance (10) Industrial IoT (101) IoT Platforms (81) Medical & Healthcare (47) Retail (28) Security (139) Smart City (88) Smart Home (91) Transport & Supply Chain (59) UI & UX (39) Voice Interaction (33)
In a procedural conversation flow, you define the order of the questions and the bot will ask the questions in the order you defined. You can organize the questions into logical modules to keep the code centralized while staying focused on guiding the conversational. For example, you may design one module to contain the logic that helps the user browse for products and a separate module to contain the logic that helps the user create a new order.
As I tinker with dialog systems at the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, primarily by prototyping Alexa skills, I often wonder what AI is still lacking to build good conversational systems, punting the social challenge to another day. This post is my take on where AI has a good chance to improve and consequently, what we can expect from the next wave of conversational systems.
In 1950, Alan Turing's famous article "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" was published, which proposed what is now called the Turing test as a criterion of intelligence. This criterion depends on the ability of a computer program to impersonate a human in a real-time written conversation with a human judge, sufficiently well that the judge is unable to distinguish reliably—on the basis of the conversational content alone—between the program and a real human. The notoriety of Turing's proposed test stimulated great interest in Joseph Weizenbaum's program ELIZA, published in 1966, which seemed to be able to fool users into believing that they were conversing with a real human. However Weizenbaum himself did not claim that ELIZA was genuinely intelligent, and the introduction to his paper presented it more as a debunking exercise: