Intelligent assistants have proliferated across various settings spurring research and ideas. However, there is a lack of clarity on how they can be defined and identified. This definitional and terminological incoherence manifests in narrow and misinformed understanding of technology and thus, poses threats to theoretical and empirical endeavors in AI. To overcome these challenges, this paper presents a definitional framework that defines intelligent assistants and distinguishes them from other technologies. This framework is informed by tracing the historical evolution of this technology in the past 70 years which saw the rise of three constitutive features in machines: AI, interaction, and assistance. A review of technology’s definitions published since 2010 and associated terminologies was also conducted to unpack their conceptual limitations and support the framework. A new definition is then presented which contends that a technology can only be characterized as an intelligent assistant if it is AI-enabled, interactive, and assistive.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sonia Jawaid Shaikh (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: