4 ms·
I've recently built a barebones chatbot. I took a different approach than most, given that I elected not to do any NLP. This is excusable based on the requireme
by 333c 8y ago
I've recently built a barebones chatbot. I took a different approach than most, given that I elected not to do any NLP. This is excusable based on the requirements for the bot — it's going to be part of an interactive theater piece, and its purpose will be to convey specific plot information.
My bot operates off of keyword matching only. There's a web interface to edit "exchanges," which act like a directed graph from message to message.
My chatbot struggles when things are not phrased in the right way (for instance, it has trouble with negatives, as in "I am not well today"). The exchanges that we're designing for the theater piece have to be carefully worded to try to avoid encountering problems like these.
Overall, I think my chatbot is a good tool for its specific application.
- mlwhiz 8y agoI totally agree. Command based bots might be the way to go for simple applications. Banks might do very well with command based bots. They know most of the questions being asked by the customer, why not automate the process. For developers, this could be fun too. One idea is to run a chatbot script on all the servers and every time I have to run system commands I can do it straight from telegram.
- BoorishBears 8y agoWhy is this better than a form? Geico did something similar. Instead of auto filling one form, you get to have 15 parts. It’s very simple to me as a user: if your chatbot is simple enough to be easy to implement, it should be a form. If it’s hard to implement with NLP and what not odds are discoverability will suck, complex operations will fail, and your bot will drive general unhappiness in the world.