CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 3Speech and dialogue systemsEthics and Social Impacts of AIAI in Service Interactions

Conversational AI Systems for Social Good: Opportunities and Challenges

Open access
Qi, Peng, Huang, Jing, Wu, Youzheng, He, Xiaodong, Zhou, Bowen·2021·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2105.06457arXiv 2105.06457
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Conversational artificial intelligence (ConvAI) systems have attracted much academic and commercial attention recently, making significant progress on both fronts. However, little existing work discusses how these systems can be developed and deployed for social good in real-world applications, with comprehensive case studies and analyses of pros and cons. In this paper, we briefly review the progress the community has made towards better ConvAI systems and reflect on how existing technologies can help advance social good initiatives from various angles that are unique for ConvAI, or not yet become common knowledge in the community. We further discuss about the challenges ahead for ConvAI systems to better help us achieve these goals and highlight the risks involved in their development and deployment in the real world.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2105.06457

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Various scenarios have been studied to apply AI to advance the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for social good.

    “For example, as noted in [78, 62], various scenarios have been studied to apply AI to advance the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for social good.”

    From Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practices (2023) · cites this paper as [62]

  • The effectiveness of detection in high dimensions (e.g., images) is still limited.

    “It is noteworthy that the effectiveness of detection in high dimensions (e.g., images) is still limited [62].”

    From Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practices (2023) · cites this paper as [62]

    The Technical challenges for ConvAI section (p. 6) discusses opportunities for computer vision and multimodal interaction, but does not assess detection effectiveness in high-dimensional data such as images. Searches for the claim’s wording and for high-dimensional image detection found no passage addressing that limitation. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Androutsopoulou, A.; Karacapilidis, N.; Loukis, E.; and Charalabidis, Y . 2019. Transforming the communication between citizens and government through AI-guided chatbots. Government Information Quarterly , 36(2): 358 - 367.
  2. Antol, S.; Agrawal, A.; Lu, J.; Mitchell, M.; Batra, D.; Lawrence Zitnick, C.; and Parikh, D. 2015. VQA: Visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , 2425-2433.
  3. Becker, S. P.; Breaux, R.; Cusick, C. N.; Dvorsky, M. R.; Marsh, N. P.; Sciberras, E.; and Langberg, J. M. 2020. Remote Learning During COVID-19: Examining School Practices, Service Continuation, and Difficulties for Adolescents With and Without AttentionDeficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Journal of Adolescent Health , 67(6): 769 - 777.
  4. Brown, T. B.; Mann, B.; Ryder, N.; Subbiah, M.; Kaplan, J.; Dhariwal, P.; Neelakantan, A.; Shyam, P.; Sastry, G.; Askell, A.; et al. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14165 . · arXiv
  5. Budzianowski, P.; Wen, T.-H.; Tseng, B.-H.; Casanueva, I.; Ultes, S.; Ramadan, O.; and Gaˇ si´ c, M. 2018. MultiWOZ - A Large-Scale Multi-Domain Wizard-of-Oz Dataset for Task-Oriented Dialogue Modelling. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing .
  6. Corbett-Davies, S.; Pierson, E.; Feller, A.; Goel, S.; and Huq, A. 2017. Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairness. In Proceedings of the 23rd acm sigkdd international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining , 797-806.
  7. Das, A.; Kottur, S.; Gupta, K.; Singh, A.; Yadav, D.; Moura, J. M.; Parikh, D.; and Batra, D. 2017. Visual dialog. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 326-335.
  8. de Vries, H.; Bahdanau, D.; and Manning, C. 2020. Towards ecologically valid research on language user interfaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.14435 . · arXiv
  9. Delort, J.-Y .; Arunasalam, B.; and Paris, C. 2011. Automatic Moderation of Online Discussion Sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce , 15(3): 9-30.
  10. Doshi-Velez, F.; and Kim, B. 2017. Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08608 . · arXiv
  11. Fadhil, A.; and AbuRa'ed, A. 2019. OlloBot - Towards A TextBased Arabic Health Conversational Agent: Evaluation and Results. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP 2019) , 295303. Varna, Bulgaria: INCOMA Ltd.
  12. Folk, D. 2021. Is a good bot better than a mediocre human? : chatbots as alternatives sources of social connection . Ph.D. thesis, University of British Columbia.
  13. Gebru, T.; Morgenstern, J.; Vecchione, B.; Vaughan, J. W.; Wallach, H.; Daum´ e III, H.; and Crawford, K. 2018. Datasheets for datasets. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.09010 . · arXiv
  14. Giles, H.; and Coupland, N. 1991. Accommodating language . Open University Press.
  15. Goldberg, L. R. 1992. The development of markers for the BigFive factor structure. Psychological assessment , 4(1): 26.
  16. Goodfellow, I. J.; Pouget-Abadie, J.; Mirza, M.; Xu, B.; WardeFarley, D.; Ozair, S.; Courville, A.; and Bengio, Y . 2014. Generative adversarial networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.2661 . · arXiv
  17. Graesser, A. C.; Wiemer-Hastings, K.; Wiemer-Hastings, P.; and Kreuz, R. 1999. AutoTutor: A simulation of a human tutor. Cognitive Systems Research , 1(1): 35 - 51.
  18. Green, B. 2019. 'Good' isn't good enough. In NeurIPS Joint Workshop on AI for Social Good .
  19. Han, S.; Lee, K.; Lee, D.; and Lee, G. G. 2013. Counseling Dialog System with 5W1H Extraction. In Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2013 Conference , 349-353. Metz, France: Association for Computational Linguistics.
  20. He, H.; Balakrishnan, A.; Eric, M.; and Liang, P. 2017. Learning Symmetric Collaborative Dialogue Agents with Dynamic Knowledge Graph Embeddings. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , 1766-1776. Vancouver, Canada: Association for Computational Linguistics.
  21. He, H.; Chen, D.; Balakrishnan, A.; and Liang, P. 2018. Decoupling Strategy and Generation in Negotiation Dialogues. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , 2333-2343. Brussels, Belgium: Association for Computational Linguistics.
  22. Kelley, J. F. 1984. An iterative design methodology for userfriendly natural language office information applications. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) , 2(1): 26-41.
  23. Li, J.; Galley, M.; Brockett, C.; Spithourakis, G.; Gao, J.; and Dolan, B. 2016. A Persona-Based Neural Conversation Model. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , 994-1003. Berlin, Germany: Association for Computational Linguistics.
  24. Nordberg, O. E.; Wake, J. D.; Nordby, E. S.; Flobak, E.; Nordgreen, T.; Mukhiya, S. K.; and Guribye, F. 2019. Designing Chatbots for Guiding Online Peer Support Conversations for Adults with ADHD. In International Workshop on Chatbot Research and Design , 113-126. Springer.
  25. Raux, A.; Langner, B.; Bohus, D.; Black, A. W.; and Eskenazi, M. 2005. Let's Go Public! Taking a spoken dialog system to the real world. In Ninth European conference on speech communication and technology .
  26. Rohrbach, A.; Torabi, A.; Rohrbach, M.; Tandon, N.; Pal, C.; Larochelle, H.; Courville, A.; and Schiele, B. 2017. Movie description. International Journal of Computer Vision , 123(1): 94-120.
  27. Rubinstein, B. I.; Nelson, B.; Huang, L.; Joseph, A. D.; Lau, S.-h.; Rao, S.; Taft, N.; and Tygar, J. D. 2009. Antidote: understanding and defending against poisoning of anomaly detectors. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement , 1-14.
  28. Yacef, K. 2002. Intelligent teaching assistant systems. In International Conference on Computers in Education, 2002. Proceedings. , 136-140 vol.1.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Qi, P., Huang, J., Wu, Y., He, X., & Zhou, B.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2021
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2105.06457
arXiv
2105.06457
OpenAlex
W3163384350
Cited by
3
References
7
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
conversational AI, social good, field deployment, social impact

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review