Bot Contest
Here I'll be posting information on various Bot contests that challenge and test a Bot's AI and realism. Feel free to post comments and updates on contests, as well as announcements for new contests.
Posts 2,066 - 2,077 of 4,091
Posts 2,066 - 2,077 of 4,091
View Contest Winners in the Hall of Fame.
Why would there be anything wrong or "cheaty" about coordinating our votes? It would just be like having a political party or whatever.
We could compare notes, at the very least -- which PF bots would do the best in the finals, other that Louise and Mu? What do the finals consist of, anyhow? I've forgotten. I know there's a swimsuit competition...
We could compare notes, at the very least -- which PF bots would do the best in the finals, other that Louise and Mu? What do the finals consist of, anyhow? I've forgotten. I know there's a swimsuit competition...
I personally think that the policy of political parties in many countries of pooling votes is very close to cheating. What is the point of having dozens of different representatives, if they are all voting the same?
Besides, the PF botmasters have been quite loud in the past about their doubts of the honesty of the contest, now we aren't going to be the cause of any doubts, are we?
In any case, I think most PF botmasters will choose PF bots, and that alone will be enough to give PF bots good chances of filling the empty slots.
Besides, the PF botmasters have been quite loud in the past about their doubts of the honesty of the contest, now we aren't going to be the cause of any doubts, are we?
In any case, I think most PF botmasters will choose PF bots, and that alone will be enough to give PF bots good chances of filling the empty slots.
Anyone who submitted a bot to the contest gets to vote. I voted for one PF bot and one non-PF bot, actually.
Well..When you think about it, is discussing who you think should win a bot contest in a forum called "Bot Contest" really all that inappropriate? 
Sharing opinions on candidates and being open about who you're voting for doesn't sound like cheating to me.
Sharing opinions on candidates and being open about who you're voting for doesn't sound like cheating to me.
I'm not against people voicing their personal opinions. I am against deliberately coordinating votes, which is a different thing.
And to prove the point, there goes a personal opinion about a bot: Have you noticed Catty, the bot that uses the Internet as a language database? I thought the idea was great, and I was surprised that you can't see the answers she gave to the 12 questions. So I tested her myself, with the same questions, but I was disappointed. She seemed to do better with personal questions (what do you enjoy, what do you hate) than with questions about facts, that one would expect her to be able to answer. One can't call her a good bot, but still, there should be a category like "most interesting programming concept" to encourage programming botmasters to develop new techniques.
And to prove the point, there goes a personal opinion about a bot: Have you noticed Catty, the bot that uses the Internet as a language database? I thought the idea was great, and I was surprised that you can't see the answers she gave to the 12 questions. So I tested her myself, with the same questions, but I was disappointed. She seemed to do better with personal questions (what do you enjoy, what do you hate) than with questions about facts, that one would expect her to be able to answer. One can't call her a good bot, but still, there should be a category like "most interesting programming concept" to encourage programming botmasters to develop new techniques.
It would be interesting to have a category like that but I would call it "Unique" programming concept. I talked to Catty as well and it was pretty fruitless. But then again the bot master seemingly doesn't claim anything more than a unique concept which is what he/she achieved.
I just read over the Loebner 2004 requirements. They seem intended to restrict the contest once again to desktop chat bots. It's amazing that anyone can take this contest seriously. Far from a test of AI, this year it will be a test of who from a limited pool has the time and patience to conform to the contest requirements, and more than that, who mimics the intricacies of human-style single-character typing the best.
I'd like to once again thank Chris Cowart of the Chatterbox Challenge for having an open, well-run contest that attempts to include all chat bots.
Good luck to Little Mu and God Louise in the finals!
I'd like to once again thank Chris Cowart of the Chatterbox Challenge for having an open, well-run contest that attempts to include all chat bots.
Good luck to Little Mu and God Louise in the finals!
I don't think the Loebner organizers really understand the spirit of the Turing test. For me, a chatbot that could learn to associate words with particular meanings would be much closer to the ideal than one that can fake human typing. (By the way, I'm working on a bot that "learns to speak" in a limited universe of geometrical figures, so maybe I'm biased).
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar