Comments on: Interview with Bot Colony creator Eugene Joseph

by: mp3 dinle

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 01:22:49 +0000

Unfortunately. Clarified in the game, is a very important issue. There will be a practical dialogue system AAAI Symposium in Pasadena later this year, and the subject is one of dialogue system robustness. This is the money: What do you do when people do not understand the machine. I felt that this well is the biggest challenge the robot group. Games can not talk about: “I do not know” too many times. But we can not answer as chatbots invention, because we do this, we lose credibility. We will work with the players know him, never pretend we do, if we do not know.Yeah,it is correct,I know more,thank you.

by: sto credits

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 07:25:17 +0000

by: Eugene Joseph

Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:16:53 +0000

I could not resolve ‘this’ in the second paragraph (really). Versions can become hegemonic among speakers of the same core language. Their becoming hegemonic has to do with the influence (and power) of the speakers. If you spoke like an educated person in Cambodia during the reign of Khmer Rouge, you could be executed. Today, everybody says ‘cool’ to be cool.

I wish our software could support the different personality types in the near term, but don’t hold your breath. About Malcolm’s remark (which was a critique): at GDC the software did have the capability shown in the YouTube Game Play video, and that was not exactly like submitting queries to a database. Still, it was a prototype, and of course it had lots of holes. The Beta will not go out until it can handle robust conversation.

by: Mark Marino

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:26:00 +0000

Malcolm and Eugene,

This an interesting point. Because when I look at some of the chatbots, particularly Ghetto Bot, I see that the game Bot Colony would have a hard time recognizing his speech, even though interactors are expected to recognize his type right away.

I believe this is how certain versions of a language become hegemonic and the way cultural groups are distinguished, differentiated, and treated accordingly.

(This is not to critique the technology, just to note the way the software is reproducing the priorities of the culture….)

by: Eugene Joseph

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:24:43 +0000

Malcolm,

Perhaps clarifications are in order.

Free-form, unrestrictied English meant no lexical restrictions (any words can be used) and no syntactic restrictions (you can order phrases and clauses differently, as long as the grammar is still correct).
We’re not making claims to understanding ill-formed English, and in the near future we won’t be able to process highly colloquial English (slang).

Can we agree on ‘free-form unrestricted, preferably super clear English’ ?