The educators or class organizers can opt for chatbots to simplify daily routine tasks. Chatbots may serve as a helping hand to the teacher in dealing with the daily queries by allowing bots to answer the questions of students on a daily basis, or perhaps even check their homework. Eventually, they offer teachers more time to work with their students on a one-by-one basis.
In 2000 a chatbot built using this approach was in the news for passing the “Turing test”, built by John Denning and colleagues. It was built to emulate the replies of a 13 year old boy from Ukraine (broken English and all). I met with John in 2015 and he made no false pretenses about the internal workings of this automaton. It may have been “brute force” but it proved a point: parts of a conversation can be made to appear “natural” using a sufficiently large definition of patterns. It proved Alan Turing’s assertion, that this question of a machine fooling humans was “meaningless”.
Multinational Naive Bayes is the classic algorithm for text classification and NLP. For an instance, let’s assume a set of sentences are given which are belonging to a particular class. With new input sentence, each word is counted for its occurrence and is accounted for its commonality and each class is assigned a score. The highest scored class is the most likely to be associated with the input sentence.
By 2022, task-oriented dialog agents/chatbots will take your coffee order, help with tech support problems, and recommend restaurants on your travel. They will be effective, if boring. What do I see beyond 2022? I have no idea. Amara’s law says that we tend to overestimate technology in the short term while underestimating it in the long run. I hope I am right about the short term but wrong about AI in 2022 and beyond! Who would object against a Starbucks barista-bot that can chat about weather and crack a good joke?
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'). 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".