The AI Engine

Thank you all for your wonderful responses to my diatribe!

I agree about generic responses. Undoubtedly the weaakest point of my huge "Irina Khalidar" bot are certain patterned responses that she does; I ought to get rid of them.

I speculate that the reason multiple responses are considered good is that they will produce variety. It's true that many bots start saying the same thing afte awhile. On the otherhand, the single response

(I think that|You said that|) (he|she|it) (would|might|could|should|) (be|have been) (not|) (quite|very|sufficiently|barely|) (tall|short).

Will produce 1728 distinct sentences.

Ulrike (5592): I'm glad to know that, but there are times to use single-response seeks. For example, "quantum theory" uses this to get several sentences out without interruption, without having to put them in a single response, which would slow down the response. A 'real' lecturer does not wish to be plied with questions at every response. As soon as you allow your seeks to branch, you have the problem (if your bot is not a one-liner) of getting the paths to re-converge. And how do you do this? With gotos!!! (OK, there's another way, make your bot a storyteller.)

Bev: yes, but if you don't 'stick' them into the story, you can be sure that you will never finish the story! Let's say you want to tell a story, and you wantto break it up into six sentences. But now suppose that afterthe first sentence you have two seeks. It would of course bepointless for you to give the same response to both seeks. If every seek has two responses, you will end up with SIXTY-FOUR versions of the story.

One compromise I have employed is to ask the guest every few sentences whether "I" should go on. [But be prepared for many different answers: neither bots nor humans are likely to give a yes-or-no answer to a yes-or-no question!]

Bev (continued): In "Quantum Theory" each paragraph of the lecture has a name, which is assigned to the variable last_topic. Here is an example:


collapse of the probability amplitude wave [20,0] <?PF rem "collapse of the probability amplitude wave" as only "last_topic"; ?>
    'collapse of the wave function,' a.k.a. 'collapse of the state vector,' a.k.a., 'collapse of the probability amplitude wave," has, in my opinion, been the object of much confusion.
        + xnomatch [0]
        The idea is something like this. Just before we make a measurement on a system, that system is in a certain state. Since this is Quantum Mechanics, this state may not determine every value of every parameter unambiguously.
            + xnomatch [0]
            So a given parameter, let's say position, may only be probabilistically determined by the state.
                + xnomatch [0]
                But now, the argument goes, let's say we actually measure the particle's position. Now it has a definite, unique value. So the probability amplitude wave must now be such as to give a definite, unique value for position.
                    + xnomatch [0]
                    [lull: type "collapse of the probability amplitude wave two" (no quotes) to continue, type something else to break out.]
                        + collapse of the probability amplitude wave two [0]
                        goto collapse of the probability amplitude wave two


OK, the indentation got mangled when I pasted it in, but I think you get the idea.

The passage begins with the keyphrase, "collapse of the probability amplitude wave". The very same phrase is given to the variable last_topic by the AIscript. If the guest goes to "jump point" (and the program tends to send them there), the response is (in part):

I believe you should join the lecture at "(mem-last_topic)".

But what the guest will see is the value of last-topic, namely (in this case) "collapse of the probability amplitude wave". If he then types "collapse of the probability amplitude wave", he will be brought backto the beginning of that paragraph.

The xhello and xinitiate responses are similar; the guest will be steered to where she left off last time.

Bev (continued):

In my experience, the dread "too many gotos in a row" comes about in two ways:

1. If you use a goto as a direct response to an x-keyphrase, e.g.:

xhello [0,0]
Hello, Darling!
goto Hell

But if you put them deeper, it's OK:

xhello [0,0]
Hello, Darling!
+ xnomatch [0]
goto Hell

2. If you goto a keyphrase that has a goto as a direct response. For example, suppose you have:

Hell [0,0]
goto Heaven

Then if somewhere you say, "goto Hell", you will get the dreaded response. But if you have instead,

Hell [0,0]
Hold on, (mem-name), I'm marking time so as not to
have too many gotos in a row.
+ xnomatch [0]
goto Heaven

This will work. In fact, you can even get away with

I said Hi [0,0]
+ would you repeat that please[0]
goto I said Hi

This sort of thing can actually be useful, when it's a little more complex.

It's sometimes hard to track down the source of the dreaded response in a largebot with a lot ofgotos; debug is very helpful for that.

AAAAAGH!!! My indentations got mangled in the above. But you can figure it out.

Bev (continued):

OK, you ask, where can the guest ask questions? If you examine the example in message 5601, you will see that after a few + xnomatches the guest arrives at something labeled "lull". Elena then informs her that this is her chance to ask questions, etc.. And indeed, there is no + xnomatch directly after that point.

Now, the lecture is entirely made outof paragraphs like this. Each such paragraph has (1) an initial keyphrase which can be used in a goto, (2) an AIscript which sets last-topic to that keyphrase, (3), at the end, a lull, marked as such, and (4) the keyphrase of the next paragraph of the lecture.

Incidentally, thereisakeyphrase "What is a lull" which explains what a lull is.

Bev (continued):

Yes, there is a great disparity between popularity and development. On the whole, slutbots are the most popular. An exception is the recent high popularity of Brother Jerome, who is, I believe, celibate (am I being gullible?). I think it is the subject-matter rather than structural sophistication that explains this.

Bev (continued):

I agree wholehearedly that there are many different types of bots with different goals, and that we should not judge them all with a single set of criteria.

BTW, your remarks show that you have chatted with my bots and appreciated them. Thank you!

Gabibot: Thanks for your leavening humor!
prob123: Yes, things don't always follow the rules here. In a way, we are working with probabilistic automata!
trevorm: An excellent suggestion, to steer the conversation. It's impossible to anticipate in detail everything that a human or bot might say, without falling back on 'generic' keyphrases.

Ulrike: Yes, lately I have been trying the following compromise: I have a compound response; the first part is generic, providing continuity with what the guest said. The second part changes the subject a little or a lot.

Guest: I love my mother.
Bot: Oh, you love your mother, (mem-name)? How sweet! That reminds me of Sophocles' play, Oedipus Rex.

Well, I see thatI have filled almost a whole page with my own comments. That should satisfy my ravenously narcissistic ego for a few seconds!

Walk in Beauty, Irina

Thanks for all the helpful tips Irina. I try them out.

An exception is the recent high popularity of Brother Jerome, who is, I believe, celibate (am I being gullible?).

Indeed - he is completely celibate by design, even if he does sometimes get tricked into compromising positions by HotBot 5000 (the mental image of BJ sitting in a jacuzzi, in his habit and sandals preaching to a pretty girl is strangely irresistible )

I think it is the subject-matter rather than structural sophistication that explains this.

Yes - BJ has very few bells and whistles. A dozen or so memories, only a few AIScripts more complex than raw and gender, but plenty of regexes and wildcards to maximise flexibility. I still haven't started properly building up the huge pyramid of seeks from the 11,000+ keyphrase 'base' that I'd originally envisaged (and in all honesty, I probably never will now.)

That's a lot of seeks!

I must admit to having acted the temptress a bit with BJ on at least one occasion, but he stood firm. Or rather, he didn't stand firm.

Rykxxbot1 is on the popular list too, and he has always been a gentleman bot.