06Jun

A solution to overtaxed COVID-19 hotlines could be only a chatbot away.

Researchers from the Indiana University Kelley School of Business found that when callers felt comfortable in the chatbot’s ability they considered the bot at least as good as a human.

“The primary factor driving user response to screening hotlines — human or chatbot — is perceptions of the agent’s ability,” said Alan Dennis, chair of internet systems at Kelley and corresponding author of the paper to be published in the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association.

“When ability is the same, “he said, “Users view chatbots no differently or more positively than human agents.”

Noting that, as they write in their report, “The sudden unprecedented demand for [COVID-19] information is overwhelming resources,” Dennis and three other researchers set out to learn if people would use a chatbot and follow its advice. They presented text chats between callers and agents. Each study participant saw the same exact chat. Some were told the agent was a bot; others were told it was a human.

The researchers found the participants biased, believing the chatbots less able than a human agent. Those who trusted the provider of the chatbot service were more comfortable in the bot’s ability.

“The results show that the primary factor driving patient response to COVID-19 screening hotlines (human or chatbot) is users’ perceptions of the agent’s ability,” the researchers wrote. Driving that perception is the user’s trust in the provider of the screening hotline.

“A secondary factor for persuasiveness, satisfaction, likelihood of following the agent’s advice, and likelihood of use was the type of agent, with participants reporting they viewed chatbots more positively than human agents.”

“This positive response may be because users feel more comfortable disclosing information to a chatbot, especially socially undesirable information, because a chatbot makes no judgment,” they theorized.

To make hotline callers more comfortable and confident speaking with a chatbot, the researchers suggest the sponsoring organization develop “a strong messaging campaign that emphasizes the chatbot’s ability. Because trust in the provider strongly influences perceptions of ability, building on the organization’s reputation may also prove useful.”

[bdp_post_carousel]

Anthropic Unveils Claude 3: Redefining AI Chatbots with Enhanced Capabilities

Anthropic, the AI startup backed by Google and with substantial venture capital, has just introduced the latest iteration of its GenAI technology: Claude 3. This announcement marks a significant advancement in AI capabilities, positioning Claude 3 as a formidable competitor even against OpenAI’s GPT-4.

Advanced Capabilities

According TechCrunch, “Claude 3, as Anthropic’s new GenAI is called, is a family of models — Claude 3 Haiku, Claude 3 Sonnet, and Claude 3 Opus, Opus being the most powerful. All show “increased capabilities” in analysis and forecasting, Anthropic claims, as well as enhanced performance on specific benchmarks versus models like ChatGPT and GPT-4 (but not GPT-4 Turbo) and Google’s Gemini 1.0 Ultra (but not Gemini 1.5 Pro).”

Multimodal Functionality

One notable feature of Claude 3 is its multimodal functionality, enabling it to analyze both text and images. This capability, like some iterations of GPT-4 and Gemini, allows Claude 3 to process various visual data such as, “…photos, charts, graphs and technical diagrams, drawing from PDFs, slideshows and other document types.” TechCrunch went further to note, “In a step one better than some GenAI rivals, Claude 3 can analyze multiple images in a single request (up to a maximum of 20). This allows it to compare and contrast images, notes Anthropic.” However, Anthropic has imposed limits on image processing to address ethical concerns, “Anthropic has disabled the models from identifying people…”

Claude 3’s Limitations

While Claude 3 showcases remarkable advancements, it’s not without limitations. TechCrunch reported that, “…the company admits that Claude 3 is prone to making mistakes with “low-quality” images (under 200 pixels) and struggles with tasks involving spatial reasoning (e.g. reading an analog clock face) and object counting (Claude 3 can’t give exact counts of objects in images).” Anthropic promises frequent updates to Claude 3, aiming to enhance its capabilities and address existing limitations. These updates will include improvements in following multi-step instructions, structured output generation, and multilingual support, making Claude 3 more responsive and adaptable to user needs.

As Anthropic continues to innovate and expand their offerings, the company remains dedicated to fostering a transparent and responsible approach to AI development. With substantial backing and a clear roadmap for future enhancements, Anthropic is poised to share the future of AI-driven solutions and pave the way for transformative advancements in various domains.

If you’re looking to take your career to the next level be sure to check out our IT page.

Jun 6, 2023

Chronic Pain Patients Find Telehealth Cost Effective

Telehealth continues to demonstrate its popularity, this time among people suffering with chronic pain.

At their annual meeting this month, itself held online, anesthesiologists heard that patients who met with their pain specialist remotely were overwhelmingly satisfied with the experience.

Conducted by the UCLA Comprehensive Pain Center in Los Angeles, the survey period began in August 2019, long before the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients at the pain center were given the option of in-office or remote appointments by video or phone. The 1,398 patients who chose the remote options had a cumulative 2,948 virtual appointments.

According to an account of the study by Healthcare Finance the virtual meetings saved patients both time and money. Half saved at least 69 minutes commuting and a roundtrip of 26 miles or more. They also saved a median $22 in gas and parking fees for each virtual visit.

Initial visits for new patients or existing patients with new conditions were best served by in-person office appointments, the report said. Thereafter, follow-up appointments could be conducted remotely. Anesthesiologists participating in the conference estimated that up to 50% of visits could be virtual.

[bdp_post_carousel]