Retention period

A retention period (associated with a retention schedule or retention program) is an aspect of records and information management (RIM) and the records life cycle that identifies the duration of time for which the information should be maintained or "retained", irrespective of format (paper, electronic, or other). Retention periods vary with different types of information, based on content and a variety of other factors, including internal organizational need, regulatory requirements for inspection or audit, legal statutes of limitation, involvement in litigation, and taxation and financial reporting needs, as well as other factors as defined by local, regional, state, national, and/or international governing entities. Once an applicable retention period has elapsed for a given type or series of information, and all holds/moratoriums have been released, the information is typically destroyed using an approved and effective destruction method, which renders the information completely and irreversibly unusable via any means. Alternatively, it may be converted from one form to another (e.g. from paper to electronic), depending on the defined retention period per format. Information with historical value beyond its "usable value" may be accessioned to the custody of an archive organization for permanent or extended long-term preservation. == Defensible disposition == Defensible disposition refers to the ability of an identified and applied retention period to effectively provide for the defense of the record, and its eventual destruction or accessioning when scrutinized within a court of law or by other review. It is commonly advised by records and information management (RIM) professionals that any and all retention periods applied to organizational information should be reviewed and approved for use by competent legal counsel, which represents the organization, and is familiar with the specific business needs and legal and regulatory requirements of the organization. Additionally, a practical approach to information assessment/classification, proper documentation of the disposition program, strategic review of disposition policy over time for efficacy are required for proper defensible disposition. == Guidance and education organizations == ARMA International Information and Records Management Society filerskeepers records retention FAQ

DeepSeek (chatbot)

DeepSeek is a generative artificial intelligence chatbot developed by the Chinese company DeepSeek. Released on 20 January 2025, DeepSeek-R1 surpassed ChatGPT as the most downloaded freeware app on the iOS App Store in the United States by 27 January. DeepSeek's success against larger and more established rivals has been described as "upending AI" and initiating "a global AI space race". DeepSeek's compliance with Chinese government censorship policies and its data collection practices have also raised concerns over privacy and information control in the model, prompting regulatory scrutiny in multiple countries. However, it has also been praised for its open weights and infrastructure code, energy efficiency and contributions to open-source artificial intelligence. == History == On 10 January 2025, DeepSeek released the chatbot, based on the DeepSeek-R1 model, for iOS and Android. By 27 January, DeepSeek-R1 surpassed ChatGPT as the most-downloaded freeware app on the iOS App Store in the United States, which resulted in an 18% drop in Nvidia's share price. And after a "large-scale" cyberattack on the same day disrupted the proper functioning of its servers, DeepSeek had limited its new user registration to phone numbers from mainland China, email addresses, or Google account logins. On 3 April 2025, in collaboration with researchers at Tsinghua University, DeepSeek published a paper unveiling a new model that combines the techniques generative reward modeling (GRM) and self-principled critique tuning (SPCT). The resulting model is referred to as DeepSeek-GRM. The goal of using these techniques is to foster more effective inference-time scaling within their LLM and chatbot services. Notably, DeepSeek has said that these new models will be released and made open source. On 30 April 2025, Deepseek released its math-focused Artificial Intelligence Model named "DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B". This model is useful for formal theorem proving and mathematical reasoning. On 24 April 2026, DeepSeek released DeepSeek V4 and V4-Pro. == Usage == DeepSeek can answer questions, solve logic problems, and write computer programs on par with other chatbots, according to benchmark tests used by American AI companies. Users can access the chatbot for free through the official DeepSeek website or mobile application, without limitation on the number of queries. DeepSeek only supports user-signup via a global email service, e.g. Gmail, Google or Yahoo. DeepSeek also offers access to the R1 and V3 models that power the chatbot via an API with a usage-based pricing model. This modality is primarily targeted towards developers and businesses. As of February 2025, API usage is priced at approximately $0.28 per million input tokens and $0.42 per million output tokens, making it less expensive than some competing services. Its web version is completely free, with 500 messages per hour cap limit to prevent bots from spamming. == Operation == DeepSeek-V3 uses significantly fewer resources compared to its peers. For example, whereas the world's leading AI companies train their chatbots with supercomputers using as many as 16,000 graphics processing units (GPUs), DeepSeek claims to have needed only about 2,000 GPUs—namely, the H800 series chips from Nvidia. It was trained in around 55 days at a cost of US$5.58 million, which is roughly one-tenth of what tech giant Meta spent building its latest AI technology. == Reactions == DeepSeek's success against larger and more established rivals has been described as "upending AI", constituting "the first shot at what is emerging as a global AI space race", and ushering in "a new era of AI brinkmanship". === Challenge to US AI dominance === DeepSeek's competitive performance at relatively minimal cost has been recognized as potentially challenging the global dominance of American AI models. Various publications and news media, such as The Hill and The Guardian, have described the release of the R1 chatbot as a "Sputnik moment" for American AI, echoing Marc Andreessen's view. OpenAI wrote a letter to the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), in March 2025, citing issues concerning a possibility that Deepseek could manipulate responses to cause harm. === Chinese perspective === DeepSeek's founder Liang Wenfeng has been compared to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, with CNN calling him the Sam Altman of China and an evangelist for AI. Chinese state media widely praised DeepSeek as a national asset. On 20 January 2025, Chinese Premier Li Qiang invited Wenfeng to his symposium with experts and asked him to provide opinions and suggestions on a draft for comments of the annual 2024 government work report. On 20 February 2025, Wenfeng met with General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Xi Jinping, who encouraged party and state leaders to experiment with DeepSeek. Government officials responded to Xi's approval of the chatbot by reportedly using it to draft legal judgements, propose medical treatment plans, and analyze surveillance videos to search for missing persons. === Performance and success === Leading figures in the American AI sector had mixed reactions to DeepSeek's performance and success. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and OpenAI CEO Altman—whose companies are involved in the United States government-backed "Stargate Project" to develop American AI infrastructure—both called DeepSeek "super impressive". Various companies including Amazon Web Services, Toyota, and Stripe are seeking to use the model in their program. When American President Donald Trump announced The Stargate Project, he referred to DeepSeek as a wake-up call and a positive development. Other leaders in the AI field, however—including Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang, Anthropic cofounder and CEO Dario Amodei, and Elon Musk—have expressed skepticism of the app's performance or of the sustainability of its success. Wang in particularly referred to DeepSeek-V3 as "earth-shattering" and DeepSeek-R1 as "top performing, or roughly on par with the best American models", but speculated that China may possess more AI-powering Nvidia H100 GPUs than thought. === Stock market implications === DeepSeek's optimization of limited resources has highlighted potential limits of United States sanctions on China's AI development, including export restrictions on advanced AI chips to China. The success of the company's AI models consequently "sparked market turmoil" and caused shares in major global technology companies to plunge on 27 January 2025: Nvidia's stock fell by as much as 17–18%, as did the stock of rival Broadcom. Other tech firms also sank, including Microsoft (down 2.5%), Google's owner Alphabet (down over 4%), and Dutch chip equipment maker ASML (down over 7%). A global sell-off of technology stocks on Nasdaq, prompted by the release of the R1 model, led to record losses of about $593 billion in the market capitalizations of AI and computer hardware companies; and by the next day a total of $1 trillion of value was wiped from American stocks. == Concerns == === Distillation === DeepSeek has been reported to sometimes claim that it is ChatGPT. OpenAI said that DeepSeek may have "inappropriately" used outputs from its model as training data in a process called distillation. However, there is currently no method to prove this conclusively. === Censorship === DeepSeek's compliance with Chinese government censorship policies and its data collection practices have raised concerns over information control in the model, prompting regulatory scrutiny in multiple countries. Reports indicate that it applies content moderation in accordance with the government's "public opinion guidance" regulations, limiting responses on topics such as the Tiananmen Square massacre and Taiwan's political status. DeepSeek models that have been uncensored also display a bias towards Chinese government viewpoints on controversial topics such as Xi Jinping's human rights record and Taiwan's political status. However, users who have downloaded the models and hosted them on their own devices and servers have reported successfully removing this censorship. Some sources have observed that the official application programming interface (API) version of R1, which runs from servers located in mainland China, uses censorship mechanisms for topics considered politically sensitive for the government of China. For example, the model may initially generate answers to questions about the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, persecution of Uyghurs, comparisons between Xi Jinping and Winnie the Pooh, and human rights in China, but a censorship mechanism deletes the uncensored response afterwards and replaces it with a message such as:"Sorry, that's beyond my current scope. Let's talk about something else." The post hoc censorship mechanisms and restrictions added on top of the model's output can be removed in the open-source version of the R1 model. If the "core Socialist values" defined by the Chinese Internet regul

Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted

Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted is a 2025 tower defense video game developed by PopCap Seattle, The Lost Pixels, and published by Electronic Arts. It is a remaster of the 2009 game Plants vs. Zombies, introducing upscaled graphics and new additional content. Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted was released for video game consoles and personal computers on October 23, 2025. It received generally positive reviews from critics, but was criticized by the original game's development team for including fabricated concept art and for mishandling the soundtrack. == Gameplay == Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted follows the same gameplay of the original Plants vs. Zombies game with very minor changes. It is a lane-based tower defense game where the player has to defend their home from incoming zombies. The player can place various plants by spending "sun", the game's currency during levels. Sun icons can be collected from the sky during daytime and from sun-producing plants such as sunflowers. Some plants can attack zombies while some can act as defense. If all zombies are defeated in a level, the player wins. If a zombie reaches the left side of the line, a lawn mower—or other similar, relevant object—will activate and clear the row of any zombies, but if the lawn mower has already been used, and another zombie crosses, the game is over. === Replanted features === Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted contains up to 4K upscaled graphics and widescreen support, in comparison to the original game's static 800x600 resolution and 4:3 aspect ratio. Replanted now has full controller support and features local multiplayer modes ported from the original game's seventh generation console ports: co-op, where two players play together with assigned roles; and Versus, where one plays as the plants and the other as the zombies. No online multiplayer is planned, however support for Steam Remote Play was later added in a patch as an alternative for Windows users. Replanted also contains quality-of-life features. Gameplay can now be sped up by the player's will, with a max speed increase of 2.5x. Sun icons can now be mass collected using the "Sun Magnet." On Windows, players can quick-select plants from their seed bank using the number keys as hotkeys. Replanted also introduces two new additional game modes. "Cloudy Day" is a set of non-linear levels in the Adventure campaign. These levels only allow Sunflowers as sun-producing plants. During these levels, the amount of sun dropped from the sky and produced by plants are lowered. At certain times, rain clouds will move over the lawn. While these clouds are present, sun will stop appearing from the sky and from Sunflowers. However, all plants will cost around half their original price and have significantly faster recharge times. "R.I.P. Mode" is a harder difficulty of the Adventure campaign, but the player is forced back to the beginning if they lose a single level. Replanted additionally features "bonus levels" included as non-linear levels in the Adventure campaign. These include 10 new minigames that were previously unused in the original game. In a later update, Replanted added "Survival: Endless" levels to all five areas of the game instead of just the daytime pool. == Development == The existence of a Plants vs. Zombies remaster was revealed in an interview with Janet Robin from The String Revolution, who they did a vinyl collaboration with the franchise in 2025 with Iam8bit. Janet stated that EA commissioned them to record an acoustic composition of the track "Crazy Dave" to be used for an "anniversary edition" of the game. The song would be additionally be a tribute to the song "Bad Guy", which artist Billie Eilish has stated to be somewhat similar to the track. Plants vs. Zombies Replanted was officially announced in a Nintendo Direct presentation in late July 2025. As an incentive, people who pre-ordered the game are given an in-game retro-styled skin of the Peashooter. Replanted was showcased at PAX West on August 25, 2025. A dev diary for Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted was uploaded to YouTube on October 17, 2025. The video features Nick Reinhart, Jake Neri, and Matt Townsend. A developer panel for the game was available during TwitchCon 2025. == Release == Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted was released for Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Xbox One, Xbox Series X and Series S, and personal computers on October 23, 2025. It was leaked onto the internet on October 17, 2025. Players discovered multiple software bugs, and multiple assets alleged to be upscaled by generative artificial intelligence were found, leading to backlash. Numerous bugs were fixed in a day-one patch on October 23, 2025. == Reception == === Critical response === The versions of Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted for Windows, PlayStation 5, and Nintendo Switch 2 received "generally favorable" reviews from critics, according to review aggregator website Metacritic, while the Xbox Series X version received "mixed or average" reviews. According to OpenCritic, 57% of critics recommended it. IGN's Alessandro Fillari called it "a good way to get re-acquainted with one of the quirkiest puzzle-strategy games of the 2000s", while acknowledging its questionable decisions. Shacknews' David Craddock said it was his favorite version of Plants vs. Zombies, stating, "it packs everything fans loved about the original game, plus lots more" while justifying its US$20 price. The Verge described Replanted as "a time capsule from a simpler, happier time". Kyle Hilliard from Game Informer praised its faithfulness, complimenting the new animations and character designs that did not alter its memorability. Noah Hunter for Final Weapon described the remake as solid, though criticized the lack of certain features and containing bugs that gate it from being excellent. Ben Lyons from Gamereactor stated Replanted is the same as the original overall, despite believing the £18 price is not justified. === Original developers === Rich Werner, the original game's character designer, claims that some concept art contained in the game, speculated to be for Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare (2014), did not originate from the original's development. Werner also stated that concept art for the Disco Zombie is fabricated; the design for the Disco Zombie was created after the estate of Michael Jackson requested the original Dancing Zombie, who resembles Michael Jackson from his Thriller music video, be removed from the game. On October 19, 2026, composer Laura Shigihara expressed her dissatisfaction with the lack of dynamic music in the game. Dynamic music would later be implemented in a later patch. In an interview featuring Rich Werner and user interface designer Matt Holmberg on April 29, 2026, Werner revealed that he and Shigihara were contacted by EA to make a music video to market Replanted. However, after the game was leaked, Werner's response on social media led EA to cancel the collaboration.

Pommerman Challenge

The Pommerman Challenge is a multi-agent game to test autonomous artificial intelligence systems. == Game structure == Two-agent team compete against each other on an 11 x 11 board. Each agent can observe only part of the board, and the agents cannot communicate. The goal is to knock down the opponents. Agents place explosives to destroy walls and collect power-ups that appear from those walls, while avoiding death. Game objects can move unpredictably or be moved by an agent. == Play == The game involves real-time decision making. Agents must choose moves in about .1 seconds. == Algorithms == The real-time requirement limits the use of compute-heavy techniques such as Monte Carlo tree search. The branching factor at each move can be as large as 1,296, because all four agents act in each step, choosing among six possibilities. The agents choose by accounting for explosions, which have lifetimes of 10 steps. Explosions derail tree search techniques, as searches with less than 10 levels ignore explosions while deeper searches consider too many choices (given the branching factor). A hybrid approach uses a limited-depth tree search followed by exploring a deterministic/pessimistic scenario. Limiting the depth keeps the search tree small. The deterministic approach can predict far in the future, by omitting branching. "Good" actions are often those that perform well under pessimistic scenarios, particularly if safety is important. Identifying the worst sequence of positions for an object can suggest where to move it. After generating pessimistic scenarios, the agent quantifies the survivability of each move, notionally the number of positions in which the agent can then remain safely (without encountering other agents). == Competitions == 3 competitions were organized with slightly changing rules during 2018–2019. === Online - FFA === This round was a warm-up online event, where each competitor controlled only one agent. Results: 1st: Agent47Agent by Yichen Gong 2nd: aiKiller by Márton Görög === NeurIPS 2018 - Team === The first Pommerman competition with in-person finals. Results: 1st: hakozakijunctions by Toshihiro Takahashi 2nd: eisenach by Márton Görög 3rd: dypm by Takayuki Osogami The 3 best performing solutions used online tree search. === NeurIPS 2019 - Team Radio === The second competition with in-person finals improved communication between teammate agents. Results: 1st: Márton Görög 2nd: Paul Jasek 3rd: Yifan Zhang

Split Up (expert system)

Split Up is an intelligent decision support system, which makes predictions about the distribution of marital property following divorce in Australia. It is designed to assist judges, registrars of the Family Court of Australia, mediators and lawyers. Split Up operates as a hybrid system, combining rule – based reasoning with neural network theory. Rule based reasoning operates within strict parameters, in the form: IF < condition(s) > then . Neural networks, by contrast, are considered to be better suited to generate decisions in uncertain domains, since they can be taught to weigh the factors considered by judicial decision makers from case data. Yet, they do not provide an explanation for the conclusions they reach. Split_up, with a view to overcome this flaw, uses argument structures proposed by Toulmin as the basis for representations from which explanations can be generated. == Application == In Australian family law, a judge in determining the distribution of property will: identify the assets of the marriage included in the common pool establish what percentage of the common pool each party will receive determine a final property order in line with the decisions made in 1. and 2. Split_Up implements step 1 and 2 : the common pool determination and the prediction of a percentage split. === The common pool determination === Since the determination of marital property is rule based, it is implemented using directed graphs. However, the percentage split between the parties is discretionary in that a judge has a wide discretion to look at each party's contributions to the marriage under section 79(4) of the Family Law Act 1975. Broadly, the contributions can be taken as financial or non-financial. The party who can demonstrate a larger contribution to the marital relationship will receive a larger proportion of the assets. The court may further look at each party's financial resources and future needs under section 75(2)of the Family Law Act 1975. These needs can include factors such as the inability to gain employment, the continued care of a child under 18 years of age or medical expenses. This means that different judges may and will reach different conclusions based on the same facts, since each judge assigns different relevant weights to each factor. Split_up determines the percentage split by using a combination of rule- based reasoning and neural networks. === The percentage split determination === In order to determine how judges weigh the different factors, 103 written judgements of commonplace cases were used to establish a database comprising 94 relevant factors for percentage split determination. The factors relevant for a percentage split determination are: Past contributions of a husband relative to those of a wife The husband's future needs relative to those of the wife The wealth of the marriage The factors relevant for a determination of past contributions are The relative direct and indirect contributions of both parties The length of the marriage The relative contributions of both parties to the homemaking role The hierarchy provides a structure that is used to decompose the task of predicting an outcome into 35 subtasks. Outputs of tasks further down the hierarchy are used as inputs into sub-tasks higher up the hierarchy. Each sub-task is treated as a separate and smaller data mining exercise. Twenty one solid arcs represent inferences performed with the use of rule sets. For example, the level of wealth of a marriage is determined by a rule, which uses the common pool value. By contrast, the fourteen dashed arcs establish inferences performed with the use of neural networks. These receive their name from the fact that they resemble a nervous system in the brain. They consist of many self – adjusting processing elements cooperating in a densely interconnected network. Each processing element generates a single output that is transmitted to the other processing element. The output signal of a processing element depends on the input to the processing element, i.e. each input is gated by a weighting factor that determines the amount of influence that the input will have on the output. The strength of the weighting factors is adjusted autonomously by the processing element as the data is processed. In Split_Up, the neural network is a statistical technique for learning the weights of each of the relevant attributes used in a percentage split determination of marital property. Hence the inputs to the neural network are contributions, future needs and wealth, and the output the percentage split predicted. On each arc there is a statistical weight. Using back propagation the neural network learns the necessary pattern to recognize the prediction. It is trained by repeatedly exposing it to examples of the problem and learning the significance (weights) of the input nodes. The neural network used by Split_up is said to generalise well if the output of the network is correct (or nearly correct) for examples not seen during training, which classifies it as an intelligent system. === Toulmin Argument Structure === Since the manner in which these weights are learned is primarily statistical, domain knowledge of legal rules and principles is not modelled directly. However, explanations for a legal conclusion in a domain as discretionary as the determining the distribution of property following divorce, are at least as important as the conclusion reached. Hence the creators of Split_Up used Toulmin Argument structures, to provide independent explanations of the conclusions reached. These operate on the basis that every argument makes an assertion based on some data. The assertion of the argument stands as the claim of the argument. Since knowing the data and the claim, does not necessarily mean that the claim follows from the data, a mechanism is required to justify the claim in the light of the data. The justification is known as the warrant. The backing of an argument supports the validity of the warrant. In the legal domain, this is typically a reference to a statute or a precedent. Here, a neural network (or rules), produce a conclusion from the data of an argument and the data, warrant and backing are reproduced to generate an explanation. It is noteworthy, though, that an argument's warrant is reproduced as an explanation regardless of the claim values used. This lack of claim - sensitivity must be overcome by the different users, i.e., the judge, the representatives for the wife and the representatives for the husband, each of whom is encouraged to use the system to prepare their cases, but not to rely exclusively on its outcome.

Chatbot

A chatbot (originally chatterbot) is a software application or web interface designed to converse through text or speech. Modern chatbots are typically online and use generative artificial intelligence systems that are capable of maintaining a conversation with a user in natural language and simulating the way a human would behave as a conversational partner. Such chatbots often use deep learning and natural language processing. Simpler chatbots have existed for decades. Chatbots have gained popularity during the AI boom of the 2020s, with the releases of generative AI chatbots such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Grok. These chatbots typically use fine-tuned large language models to generate text. A major area where chatbots have long been used is customer service and support, with various sorts of virtual assistants. == History == === Turing test === In 1950, Alan Turing published an article entitled "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" in which he proposed what is now called the Turing test as a criterion of intelligence. This criterion depends on the ability of a computer program to impersonate a human in a real-time written conversation with a human judge, to the extent that the judge is incapable of reliably distinguishing, on the basis of the conversational content alone, between the program and a real human. === Early chatbots === Joseph Weizenbaum's program ELIZA was first published in 1966. Weizenbaum did not claim that ELIZA was genuinely intelligent, and the introduction to his paper presented it more as a debunking exercise:In artificial intelligence, machines are made to behave in wondrous ways, often sufficient to dazzle even the most experienced observer. But once a particular program is unmasked, once its inner workings are explained, its magic crumbles away; it stands revealed as a mere collection of procedures. The observer says to himself "I could have written that". With that thought, he moves the program in question from the shelf marked "intelligent", to that reserved for curios. The object of this paper is to cause just such a re-evaluation of the program about to be "explained". Few programs ever needed it more. ELIZA's key method of operation involves the recognition of clue words or phrases in the input, and the output of the corresponding pre-prepared or pre-programmed responses that can move the conversation forward in an apparently meaningful way (e.g. by responding to any input that contains the word 'MOTHER' with 'TELL ME MORE ABOUT YOUR FAMILY'). Thus an illusion of understanding is generated, even though the processing involved has been merely superficial. ELIZA showed that such an illusion is surprisingly easy to generate because human judges are ready to give the benefit of the doubt when conversational responses are capable of being interpreted as "intelligent". Following ELIZA, psychiatrist Kenneth Colby developed PARRY in 1972. From 1978 to some time after 1983, the CYRUS project led by Janet Kolodner constructed a chatbot simulating Cyrus Vance (57th United States Secretary of State). It used case-based reasoning, and updated its database daily by parsing wire news from United Press International. The program was unable to process the news items subsequent to the surprise resignation of Cyrus Vance in April 1980, and the team constructed another chatbot simulating his successor, Edmund Muskie. In 1984, an interactive version of the program Racter was released which acted as a chatbot. A.L.I.C.E. was released in 1995. This uses a markup language called AIML, which is specific to its function as a conversational agent, and has since been adopted by various other developers of, so-called, Alicebots. A.L.I.C.E. is a weak AI without any reasoning capabilities. It is based on a similar pattern matching technique as ELIZA in 1966. This is not strong AI, which would require sapience and logical reasoning abilities. Jabberwacky, released in 1997, learns new responses and context based on real-time user interactions, rather than being driven from a static database. Chatbot competitions focus on the Turing test or more specific goals. Two such annual contests are the Loebner Prize and The Chatterbox Challenge (the latter has been offline since 2015, however, materials can still be found from web archives). Pre-dating the current generation of large language models, Gavagai, a Swedish language technology startup, created a Twitter-based bot in 2015 and DBpedia created a chatbot during the 2017 Google Summer of Code that communicated through Facebook Messenger. === Modern chatbots based on large language models === Modern chatbots like ChatGPT are often based on foundational large language models called generative pre-trained transformers (GPT). They are based on a deep learning architecture called the transformer, which contains artificial neural networks. They generate text after being trained on a large text corpus, and have emergent abilities that they are not specifically trained for. Chatbots integrated into apps and websites can call image-generation models or search the web. Some platforms also enable users to interact with conversational interfaces directly through web-based chat environments, allowing real-time assistance, content generation, and task automation without requiring software installation. == Application == === Messaging apps === Many companies' chatbots run on messaging apps or simply via SMS. They are used for B2C customer service, sales and marketing. In 2016, Facebook Messenger allowed developers to place chatbots on their platform. There were 30,000 bots created for Messenger in the first six months, rising to 100,000 by September 2017. Since September 2017, this has also been as part of a pilot program on WhatsApp. Airlines KLM and Aeroméxico both announced their participation in the testing; both airlines had previously launched customer services on the Facebook Messenger platform. The bots usually appear as one of the user's contacts, but can sometimes act as participants in a group chat. Many banks, insurers, media companies, e-commerce companies, airlines, hotel chains, retailers, health care providers, government entities, and restaurant chains have used chatbots to answer simple questions, increase customer engagement, for promotion, and to offer additional ways to order from them. Chatbots are also used in market research to collect short survey responses. A 2017 study showed 4% of companies used chatbots. In a 2016 study, 80% of businesses said they intended to have one by 2020. ==== As part of company apps and websites ==== Previous generations of chatbots were present on company websites, e.g. Ask Jenn from Alaska Airlines which debuted in 2008 or Expedia's virtual customer service agent which launched in 2011. The newer generation of chatbots includes IBM Watson-powered "Rocky", introduced in February 2017 by the New York City-based e-commerce company Rare Carat to provide information to prospective diamond buyers. ==== Chatbot sequences ==== Used by marketers to script sequences of messages, very similar to an autoresponder sequence. Such sequences can be triggered by user opt-in or the use of keywords within user interactions. After a trigger occurs a sequence of messages is delivered until the next anticipated user response. Each user response is used in the decision tree to help the chatbot navigate the response sequences to deliver the correct response message. === Company internal platforms === Companies have used chatbots for customer support, human resources, or in Internet-of-Things (IoT) projects. Overstock.com, for one, has reportedly launched a chatbot named Mila to attempt to automate certain processes when customer service employees request sick leave. Other large companies such as Lloyds Banking Group, Royal Bank of Scotland, Renault and Citroën are now using chatbots instead of call centres with humans to provide a first point of contact. In large companies, like in hospitals and aviation organizations, chatbots are also used to share information within organizations, and to assist and replace service desks. === Customer service === Chatbots have been proposed as a replacement for customer service departments. In 2026, The Financial Times reported on agentic chatbots that could do shopping for customers once given instructions. In 2016, Russia-based Tochka Bank launched a chatbot on Facebook for a range of financial services, including a possibility of making payments. In July 2016, Barclays Africa also launched a Facebook chatbot. === Healthcare === Chatbots are also appearing in the healthcare industry. A study suggested that physicians in the United States believed that chatbots would be most beneficial for scheduling doctor appointments, locating health clinics, or providing medication information. A 2025 review found that participants often rated chatbot responses as more empathic than those from clinicians. In 2020, WhatsApp worked with th

Uncertain inference

Uncertain inference was first described by C. J. van Rijsbergen as a way to formally define a query and document relationship in Information retrieval. This formalization is a logical implication with an attached measure of uncertainty. == Definitions == Rijsbergen proposes that the measure of uncertainty of a document d to a query q be the probability of its logical implication, i.e.: P ( d → q ) {\displaystyle P(d\to q)} A user's query can be interpreted as a set of assertions about the desired document. It is the system's task to infer, given a particular document, if the query assertions are true. If they are, the document is retrieved. In many cases the contents of documents are not sufficient to assert the queries. A knowledge base of facts and rules is needed, but some of them may be uncertain because there may be a probability associated to using them for inference. Therefore, we can also refer to this as plausible inference. The plausibility of an inference d → q {\displaystyle d\to q} is a function of the plausibility of each query assertion. Rather than retrieving a document that exactly matches the query we should rank the documents based on their plausibility in regards to that query. Since d and q are both generated by users, they are error prone; thus d → q {\displaystyle d\to q} is uncertain. This will affect the plausibility of a given query. By doing this it accomplishes two things: Separate the processes of revising probabilities from the logic Separate the treatment of relevance from the treatment of requests Multimedia documents, like images or videos, have different inference properties for each datatype. They are also different from text document properties. The framework of plausible inference allows us to measure and combine the probabilities coming from these different properties. Uncertain inference generalizes the notions of autoepistemic logic, where truth values are either known or unknown, and when known, they are true or false. == Example == If we have a query of the form: q = A ∧ B ∧ C {\displaystyle q=A\wedge B\wedge C} where A, B and C are query assertions, then for a document D we want the probability: P ( D → ( A ∧ B ∧ C ) ) {\displaystyle P(D\to (A\wedge B\wedge C))} If we transform this into the conditional probability P ( ( A ∧ B ∧ C ) | D ) {\displaystyle P((A\wedge B\wedge C)|D)} and if the query assertions are independent we can calculate the overall probability of the implication as the product of the individual assertions probabilities. == Further work == Croft and Krovetz applied uncertain inference to an information retrieval system for office documents they called OFFICER. In office documents the independence assumption is valid since the query will focus on their individual attributes. Besides analysing the content of documents one can also query about the author, size, topic or collection for example. They devised methods to compare document and query attributes, infer their plausibility and combine it into an overall rating for each document. Besides that uncertainty of document and query contents also had to be addressed. Probabilistic logic networks is a system for performing uncertain inference; crisp true/false truth values are replaced not only by a probability, but also by a confidence level, indicating the certitude of the probability. Markov logic networks allow uncertain inference to be performed; uncertainties are computed using the maximum entropy principle, in analogy to the way that Markov chains describe the uncertainty of finite-state machines.