Content deleted Content added
expand, add citation |
Updated the section about taxonomies with an additional section. |
||
Line 29:
* '''Interaction style''' (dull, alternate vocabulary, relationship-builder, human-like)
* '''Communication channel''' (text, voice, or both)
Erlenhov et al.<ref name="Erlenhov2020">{{Cite journal|last1=Erlenhov|first1=Linda|last2=Gomes de Oliveira Neto|first2=Francisco|last3=Leitner|first3=Philipp|year=2020|title=An Empirical Study of Bots in Software Development: Characteristics and Challenges from a Practitioner’s Perspective|url=https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3368089.3409680|journal=Proceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering|___location=Virtual Event, USA, Canada|publisher=ACM|pages=445–455|doi=10.1145/3368089.3409680|isbn=9781450370431}}</ref> raised the question of the difference between a bot and simple automation, since much research done in the name of software bots uses the term bot to describe various different tools and sometimes things are "just" plain old development tools. After interviewing and surveying over 100 developers the authors found that not one, but three definitions dominated the community. They created three personas based on these definitions and the difference between what the three personas see as being a bot is mainly the association with a different
set of human-like traits.
* The chat bot persona (Charlie) primarily thinks of bots as tools that communicates with the developer through a natural language interface (typically voice or chat), and caring little about what tasks
the bot is used for or how it actually implements these tasks.
* The autonomous bot persona (Alex) thinks of bots as tools that work on their own (without requiring much input from a developer) on a task that would normally be done by a human.
* The smart bot persona (Sam) separates bots and plain old development tools through how smart (technically
sophisticated) a tool is. Sam cares less about how the tool communicates, but more about if it is unusually good or adaptive at executing a task. The authors recommends that people doing research or writing about bots try to put their work in the context of one of the personas since the personas have different expectations and problems with the tools.
==Example of notable bots==
| |||