Service chatbots: A systematic review
Publication type: Journal Article
Publication date: 2021-12-01
scimago Q1
wos Q1
SJR: 1.854
CiteScore: 15.0
Impact factor: 7.5
ISSN: 09574174, 18736793
Computer Science Applications
General Engineering
Artificial Intelligence
Abstract
• This review conducts a quantitative analysis of state-of-the-art service chatbot. • Deep and reinforcement learnings dominate the most used chatbot design techniques. • Twitter dataset emerges to be the most popular dataset used for chatbot evaluation. • Accuracy becomes the most frequently used performance evaluation metric for chatbot. Chatbots or Conversational agents are the next significant technological leap in the field of conversational services, that is, enabling a device to communicate with a user upon receiving user requests in natural language. The device uses artificial intelligence and machine learning to respond to the user with automated responses. While this is a relatively new area of study, the application of this concept has increased substantially over the last few years. The technology is no longer limited to merely emulating human conversation but is also being increasingly used to answer questions, either in academic environments or in commercial uses, such as situations requiring assistants to seek reasons for customer dissatisfaction or recommending products and services. The primary purpose of this literature review is to identify and study the existing literature on cutting-edge technology in developing chatbots in terms of research trends, their components and techniques, datasets and domains used, as well as evaluation metrics most used between 2011 and 2020. Using the standard SLR guidelines designed by Kitchenham, this work adopts a systematic literature review approach and utilizes five prestigious scientific databases for identifying, extracting, and analyzing all relevant publications during the search. The related publications were filtered based on inclusion/exclusion criteria and quality assessment to obtain the final review paper. The results of the review indicate that the exploitation of deep learning and reinforcement learning architecture is the most used technique to understand users’ requests and to generate appropriate responses. Besides, we also found that the Twitter dataset (open domain) is the most popular dataset used for evaluation, followed by Airline Travel Information Systems (ATIS) (close domain) and Ubuntu Dialog Corpora (technical support) datasets. The SLR review also indicates that the open domain provided by the Twitter dataset, airline and technical support are the most common domains for chatbots. Moreover, the metrics utilized most often for evaluating chatbot performance (in descending order of popularity) were found to be accuracy, F1-Score, BLEU (Bilingual Evaluation Understudy), recall, human-evaluation, and precision.
Found
Nothing found, try to update filter.
Found
Nothing found, try to update filter.
Top-30
Journals
|
1
2
3
4
|
|
|
Communications in Computer and Information Science
4 publications, 3.15%
|
|
|
Journal of Medical Internet Research
3 publications, 2.36%
|
|
|
Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems
3 publications, 2.36%
|
|
|
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction
3 publications, 2.36%
|
|
|
Procedia Computer Science
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
International Journal of Consumer Studies
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Intelligent Systems with Applications
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Universal Access in the Information Society
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Behaviour and Information Technology
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Neural Computing and Applications
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
IEEE Access
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Scientific Reports
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
International Journal of Case Studies in Business IT and Education
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
BMC Oral Health
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Wireless Personal Communications
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
MRS Communications
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Electronics (Switzerland)
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Big Data and Cognitive Computing
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Interactive Technology and Smart Education
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Expert Systems with Applications
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
SN Computer Science
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Human-Computer Interaction
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Discover Artificial Intelligence
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
1
2
3
4
|
Publishers
|
5
10
15
20
25
30
|
|
|
Springer Nature
29 publications, 22.83%
|
|
|
Elsevier
20 publications, 15.75%
|
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
16 publications, 12.6%
|
|
|
JMIR Publications
9 publications, 7.09%
|
|
|
Taylor & Francis
7 publications, 5.51%
|
|
|
Emerald
6 publications, 4.72%
|
|
|
MDPI
6 publications, 4.72%
|
|
|
IGI Global
6 publications, 4.72%
|
|
|
Wiley
5 publications, 3.94%
|
|
|
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
5 publications, 3.94%
|
|
|
Hindawi Limited
3 publications, 2.36%
|
|
|
Srinivas University
2 publications, 1.57%
|
|
|
Cambridge University Press
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Fakulteta za Organizacijske Vede, Univerza v Mariboru
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
SAGE
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
AIP Publishing
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
PeerJ
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Virtus Interpress
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
Moscow State University of Psychology and Education
1 publication, 0.79%
|
|
|
5
10
15
20
25
30
|
- We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
- Statistics recalculated weekly.
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
127
Total citations:
127
Citations from 2024:
69
(54.33%)
Cite this
GOST |
RIS |
BibTex
Cite this
GOST
Copy
Mohamad Suhaili S., Salim N., Jambli M. N. Service chatbots: A systematic review // Expert Systems with Applications. 2021. Vol. 184. p. 115461.
GOST all authors (up to 50)
Copy
Mohamad Suhaili S., Salim N., Jambli M. N. Service chatbots: A systematic review // Expert Systems with Applications. 2021. Vol. 184. p. 115461.
Cite this
RIS
Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115461
UR - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115461
TI - Service chatbots: A systematic review
T2 - Expert Systems with Applications
AU - Mohamad Suhaili, Sinarwati
AU - Salim, Naomie
AU - Jambli, Mohamad Nazim
PY - 2021
DA - 2021/12/01
PB - Elsevier
SP - 115461
VL - 184
SN - 0957-4174
SN - 1873-6793
ER -
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors)
Copy
@article{2021_Mohamad Suhaili,
author = {Sinarwati Mohamad Suhaili and Naomie Salim and Mohamad Nazim Jambli},
title = {Service chatbots: A systematic review},
journal = {Expert Systems with Applications},
year = {2021},
volume = {184},
publisher = {Elsevier},
month = {dec},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115461},
pages = {115461},
doi = {10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115461}
}