Papers › Evaluating Quality of Chatbots and Intelligent Conversational Agents
Evaluating Quality of Chatbots and Intelligent Conversational Agents
Nicole M. Radziwill, Morgan C. Benton
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Chatbots are one class of intelligent, conversational software agents activated by natural language input (which can be in the form of text, voice, or both). They provide conversational output in response, and if commanded, can sometimes also execute tasks. Although chatbot technologies have existed since the 1960s and have influenced user interface development in games since the early 1980s, chatbots are now easier to train and implement. This is due to plentiful open source code, widely available development platforms, and implementation options via Software as a Service (SaaS). In addition to enhancing customer experiences and supporting learning, chatbots can also be used to engineer social harm - that is, to spread rumors and misinformation, or attack people for posting their thoughts and opinions online. This paper presents a literature review of quality issues and attributes as they relate to the contemporary issue of chatbot development and implementation. Finally, quality assessment approaches are reviewed, and a quality assessment method based on these attributes and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is proposed and examined.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections