When Your Building Super Is an A.I. Bot

"Artificial intelligence is doing everything from helping landlords communicate with tenants to managing energy use.

The new maintenance coordinator at an apartment complex in Dallas has been getting kudos from tenants and colleagues for good work and late-night assistance. Previously, the eight people on the property’s staff, managing the buildings’ 814 apartments and town homes, were overworked and putting in more hours than they wanted.

Besides working overtime, the new staff member at the complex, the District at Cypress Waters, is available 24/7 to schedule repair requests and doesn’t take any time off.

That’s because the maintenance coordinator is an artificial intelligence bot that the property manager, Jason Busboom, began using last year. The bot, which sends text messages using the name Matt, takes requests and manages appointments.

The team also has Lisa, the leasing bot that answers questions from prospective tenants, and Hunter, the bot that reminds people to pay rent. 

Mr. Busboom chose the personalities he wanted for each A.I. assistant: Lisa is professional and informative; Matt is friendly and helpful; and Hunter is stern, needing to sound authoritative when reminding tenants to pay rent.

The technology has freed up valuable time for Mr. Busboom’s human staff, he said, and everyone is now much happier in his or her job. Before, “when someone took vacation, it was very stressful,” he added.

Chatbots — as well as other A.I. tools that can track the use of common areas and monitor energy use, aid construction management and perform other tasks — are becoming more commonplace in property management. The money and time saved by the new technologies could generate $110 billion or more in value for the real estate industry, according to a report released in 2023 by McKinsey Global Institute. But A.I.’s advances and its catapult into public consciousness have also stirred up questions about whether tenants should be informed when they’re interacting with an A.I. bot.

Ray Weng, a software programmer, learned he was dealing with A.I. leasing agents while searching for an apartment in New York last year, when agents in two buildings used the same name and gave the same answers for his questions.

“I’d rather deal with a person,” he said. “It’s a big commitment to sign a lease.”

Some of the apartment tours he took were self-guided, Mr. Weng said, “and if it’s all automated, it feels like they don’t care enough to have a real person talk to me.”

EliseAI, a software company based in New York whose virtual assistants are used by owners of nearly 2.5 million apartments across the United States, including some operated by the property management company Greystar, is focused on making its assistants as humanlike as possible, said Minna Song, the chief executive of EliseAI. Aside from being available through chat, text and email, the bots can interact with tenants via voice and can have different accents.

The virtual assistants that help with maintenance requests can ask follow-up questions like verifying which sink needs to be fixed in case a tenant isn’t available when the repair is being done, Ms. Song said, and some are beginning to help renters troubleshoot maintenance issues on their own. Tenants with a leaky toilet, for example, may receive a message with a video showing them where the water shut-off valve is and how to use it while they wait for a plumber.

The technology is so good at carrying on a conversation and asking follow-up questions that tenants often mistake the A.I. assistant for a human. “People come to the leasing office and ask for Elise by name,” Ms. Song said, adding that tenants have texted the chatbot to meet for coffee, told managers that Elise deserved a raise and even dropped off gift cards for the chatbot.

Not telling customers that they’ve been interacting with a bot is risky. Duri Long, an assistant professor of communication studies at Northwestern University, said it could make some people lose trust in the company using the technology.

Alex John London, a professor of ethics and computational technologies at Carnegie Mellon University, said people could view the deception as disrespectful.

“All things considered, it is better to have your bot announce at the beginning that it is a computer assistant,” Dr. London said.

Ms. Song said it was up to each company to monitor evolving legal standards and be thoughtful about what it told consumers. A vast majority of states do not have laws that require the disclosure of the use of A.I. in communicating with a human, and the laws that do exist primarily relate to influencing voting and sales, so a bot used for maintenance-scheduling or rent-reminding wouldn’t have to be disclosed to customers. (The District at Cypress Waters does not tell tenants and prospective tenants that they’re interacting with an A.I. bot.)

Another risk involves the information that the A.I. is generating. Milena Petrova, an associate professor who teaches real estate and corporate finance at Syracuse University, said humans needed to be “involved to be able to critically analyze any results,” especially for any interaction outside the most simple and common ones.

Sandeep Dave, chief digital and technology officer of CBRE, a real estate services firm, said it didn’t help that the A.I. “comes across as very confident, so people will tend to believe it.”

Marshal Davis, who manages real estate and a real estate technology consulting company, monitors the A.I. system he created to help his two office workers answer the 30 to 50 calls they receive daily at a 160-apartment complex in Houston. The chatbot is good at answering straightforward questions, like those about rent payment procedures or details about available apartments, Mr. Davis said. But on more complicated issues, the system can “answer how it thinks it should and not necessarily how you want it to,” he said.

Mr. Davis records most calls, runs them through another A.I. tool to summarize them and then listens to the ones that seem problematic — like “when the A.I. says, ‘Customer voiced frustration,’” he said — to understand how to improve the system.

Some tenants aren’t completely sold. Jillian Pendergast interacted with bots last year while searching for an apartment in San Diego. “They’re fine for booking appointments,” she said, but dealing with A.I. assistants instead of humans can get frustrating when they start repeating responses.

“I can see the potential, but I feel like they are still in the trial-and-error phase,” Ms. Pendergast said." [1]

1. When Your Building Super Is an A.I. Bot: square feet. Weed, Julie.  New York Times (Online) New York Times Company. Jun 26, 2024.

Su dirbtinio intelekto padėjėjais reikalingas sunkus darbas, kad gauti iš jų visą vertę

„Dirbtinio intelekto (AI) darbo pagalbininkai buvo sukurti tam, kad verslui būtų gana lengvas kelias į pažangiausias technologijas. Tai ne visai taip išeina, o vyriausieji informacijos pareigūnai sako, kad norint gauti visą brangių įrankių duodamą naudą, reikalingas didelis vidinis darbas.

 

 „Darbo buvo daugiau, nei tikėtasi“, – sakė tinklo technologijų bendrovės „Juniper Networks“ vyriausioji informacijos pareigūnė Sharon Mandell, kuri išbando kelių pardavėjų įrankius, bet nesijaučia pasiruošusi jų pradėti naudoti.

 

 Įrankiai, pvz., „Copilot“, skirti „Microsoft 365“ arba „Gemini“, skirti „Google Workspace“, skirti, kad visą generatyvaus AI galimybių galią atiduoti į įmonių darbuotojų rankas – tai žada saugius, iš anksto supakuotus būdus įmonėms naudoti šią technologiją.

 

 Dirbant kartu su „Microsoft“ arba „Google“ įmonių rinkiniais ir dideliais įmonės duomenų rinkiniais, įskaitant el. laiškus, dokumentus ir skaičiuokles, žadama, kad įrankiai gali pateikti patikimus atsakymus į tokius klausimus, kaip „kokie mūsų naujausi pardavimo duomenys?

 

 Tačiau taip būna ne visada – iš dalies dėl to, kad įmonės duomenys, prie kurių jie pasiekia, ne visada yra naujausi arba tikslūs, o iš dalies dėl to, kad įrankiai vis dar bręsta.

 

 Mandell sakė, kad jei ji užduos klausimą, susijusį su 2024 m. duomenimis, AI įrankis gali pateikti atsakymą, pagrįstą 2023 m. duomenimis. „Cargill“ AI įrankis nesugebėjo teisingai atsakyti į paprastą klausimą apie tai, kas yra bendrovės vykdomojoje komandoje, sakė žemės ūkio milžinas. „Eli Lilly“ įrankis davė neteisingus atsakymus į klausimus apie išlaidų politiką, sakė Diogo Rau, farmacijos įmonės vyriausiasis informacijos ir skaitmeninių technologijų pareigūnas.

 

 Suklupimai kyla dėl didėjančio įmonių susidomėjimo generuojamuoju dirbtiniu intelektu, taip pat CIO pastangų išbandyti potencialų produktyvumo padidėjimą, kurį žada įrankiai, kurių kaina vienam vartotojui gali būti 30 dolerių per mėnesį.

 

 "Likau dirbtinio intelekto optimistas ir esu įsitikinęs, kad mes ten pasieksime. Tai užtruks šiek tiek ilgiau, nei, galbūt, manėme", - sakė Mandell.

 

 CIO, suinteresuoti tobulėti su technologijomis, dabar sunkiai dirba, kad išvalytų ir tvarkytų jų duomenis, kad galėtų visapusiškai pasinaudoti.

 

 Bala Krishnapillai, „Hitachi Americas“ viceprezidentas ir informacinių technologijų grupės vadovas, teigė, kad organizacija susidūrė su nenuosekliais, pasikartojančiais ir neteisingais duomenimis, dėl kurių gaunama prieštaringa informacija, kuri painioja AI rezultatus.

 

 Jis sakė, kad bendrovė reguliariai atnaujina ir tobulina jos duomenis, kad užtikrintų tikslius AI įrankių, pasiekiančių juos, rezultatus. Šis procesas apima, kad organizacijos duomenų inžinieriai patvirtina ir išvalo gaunamus duomenis ir surenka juos į „auksinį įrašą“ be prieštaringos ar pasikartojančios informacijos.

 

 „Tai pats pirmas dalykas, į kurį sutelkėme dėmesį“, – apie duomenų išvalymą sakė „Kyndryl“ CIO Michaelas Bradshaw, organizacijai ruošiantis naudoti „Copilot“. Bradshaw teigė, kad „Copilot“ turi puikių galimybių, tačiau įmonė turi būti pasirengusi ja naudotis – tvarkyti duomenis, juos atnaujinti ir dirbti saugiai.

 

 Pardavėjai atkreipė dėmesį į problemą. „Kai įmonės pradėjo naudoti „Copilot“, žmonės pradėjo rasti duomenų, prie kurių įmonės nežinojo, kad turi prieigą arba apie kuriuos suprato, kad jie nėra tokie nauji ar vertingi, kaip galėtų būti. Ir tada jie suprato: „O, mes turiu padaryti daugiau“, – sakė Jaredas Spataro, „Microsoft“ AI at Work viceprezidentas.

 

 Viską apsunkina tai, kad Copilot ne visada žino, kur kreiptis, kad rastų atsakymą į konkretų klausimą, sakė Spataro. Pasak jo, užduodamas klausimą apie pajamas, Copilot nebūtinai žinos, kad turi eiti tiesiai į įmonės finansų sistemą, o ne rinkti bet kokius su pajamomis susijusius skaičius, rodomus el. laiškuose ar dokumentuose.

 

 Siekdama kovoti su tuo, „Microsoft“ neseniai pristatė įrankį, žinomą kaip „Copilot Studio“, kuris leidžia įmonėms nukreipti „Copilot“ ieškoti autoritetingų duomenų šaltinių savo sistemose, kai kiltų tam tikrų klausimų.

 

 Kai kurie „Copilot“ iššūkiai yra susiję su sudėtingu raginimo menu, sakė Spataro. Jis sakė, kad vartotojai gali nesuprasti, kiek konteksto jiems reikia pateikti „Copilot“, kad gautų teisingą atsakymą, tačiau pridūrė, kad pats „Copilot“ taip pat galėtų geriau prašyti daugiau konteksto, kai jo reikia. "Manau, kad daugelis žmonių pirmą kartą susiduria su technologija ir yra šiek tiek nusivylę", - sakė Spataro." [1]

1.  AI Work Assistants Require a Heavy Lift To Get Their Full Value. Bousquette, Isabelle.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 26 June 2024: B.4.

AI Work Assistants Require a Heavy Lift To Get Their Full Value

"Artificial-intelligence work assistants were designed to provide businesses a relatively easy avenue into the cutting edge technology. It isn't quite turning out that way, with chief information officers saying it requires a heavy internal lift to get full value from the pricey tools.

"It has been more work than anticipated," said Sharon Mandell, chief information officer of network-tech company Juniper Networks, who is testing tools from several vendors but doesn't feel ready to put any into production.

Tools like Copilot for Microsoft 365 or Gemini for Google Workspace aim to put the full power of generative-AI capabilities into the hands of corporate workforces -- promising safe, prepackaged ways for enterprises to use the technology.

Working in tandem with the Microsoft or Google enterprise suites and large bodies of enterprise data -- including emails, documents and spreadsheets -- the promise is the tools can deliver reliable answers to questions such as "what are our latest sales figures?"

But that isn't always the case -- in part because the enterprise data they are accessing isn't always up-to-date or accurate and in part because the tools are still maturing.

Mandell said if she asks a question related to 2024 data, the AI tool might deliver an answer based on 2023 data. At Cargill, an AI tool failed to correctly answer a straightforward question about who is on the company's executive team, the agricultural giant said. At Eli Lilly, a tool gave incorrect answers to questions about expense policies, said Diogo Rau, the pharmaceutical firm's chief information and digital officer.

The stumbles come amid surging corporate interest in generative AI as well as efforts by CIOs to test the potential productivity gains promised by tools that can carry a $30-a-month price tag per user.

"I remain an AI optimist and am confident that we'll get there. It's just taking a little longer than perhaps we thought," Mandell said.

CIOs interested in moving forward with the technology are now working hard to clean up and manage their data so they can take full advantage.

Bala Krishnapillai, vice president and head of the information technology group at Hitachi Americas, said the organization has encountered instances of inconsistent, duplicated and incorrect data, leading to contradictory information that confuses AI outputs.

He said the company is regularly updating and refining its data to ensure accurate results from AI tools accessing it. That process includes the organization's data engineers validating and cleaning up incoming data, and curating it into a "golden record" with no contradictory or duplicate information.

"That's the very first thing we focused on," Kyndryl CIO Michael Bradshaw said about cleaning up data as the organization prepared to use Copilot. Bradshaw said Copilot has great capabilities, but a company has to be prepared to use it -- by keeping data organized, up-to-date and secure.

Vendors have noted the issue. "As companies started using Copilot, people started finding data that companies didn't know they had access to, or that they realized wasn't as fresh or as valuable as it could be. And then they realized, 'Oh, we've got to do more,'" said Jared Spataro, corporate vice president of AI at Work at Microsoft.

Complicating matters is the fact Copilot doesn't always know where to go to find an answer to a particular question, Spataro said. When asked a question about revenue, Copilot won't necessarily know to go straight to the enterprise financial system of record rather than picking up any revenue-related numbers that appear in emails or documents, he said.

To combat this, Microsoft recently introduced a tool known as Copilot Studio, which allows companies to direct Copilot to go to authoritative data sources within their systems for particular questions.

Some of the challenges with Copilot are related to the complicated art of prompting, Spataro said. Users might not understand how much context they actually need to give Copilot to get the right answer, he said, but he added that Copilot itself could also get better at asking for more context when it needs it. "A lot of people, I think, are having their first initial encounters with the technology and being a little bit disappointed," Spataro said." [1]

1.  AI Work Assistants Require a Heavy Lift To Get Their Full Value. Bousquette, Isabelle.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 26 June 2024: B.4.

 

Mes, visiški nuliai pasaulio ekonomikoje, diplomatijoje ir karyboje, surenkantys dronus iš kiniškų detalių, nes savų pasigaminti nesugebame, saugosime kažkokias naivias paslaptis nuo tų pačių kinų?

"Vyriausybė siekia, kad dirbantiesiems su įslaptinta informacija įstatymu būtų uždrausta vykti į Rusiją, Baltarusiją ir Kiniją.

 

Ministrų kabinetas trečiadienį pritarė atitinkamoms Valstybės ir tarnybos paslapčių įstatymo pataisoms. Toliau projektą svarstys Seimas.

 

„Projektu siekiama apsaugoti valstybės institucijų darbuotojus, kuriems yra išduotas leidimas dirbti ar susipažinti su įslaptinta informacija (...) nuo priešiškos jų atžvilgiu užsienio valstybių tarnybų veiklos“, – BNS nurodė projektą rengusi Krašto apsaugos ministerija (KAM).

 

Tokį sprendimą, anot jos, lėmė žvalgybos perspėjimai apie bandymus verbuoti lietuvius, galinčius prieiti prie įslaptintos informacijos.

 

Anot projekto, ne tarnybos ar ne darbo tikslais vykti į Vyriausybės nustatytas užsienio valstybes negalėtų tie darbuotojai, kuriems suteikti leidimai dirbti su įslaptinta arba riboto naudojimo informacija.

 

Tokie asmenys būtų išleidžiami išimtinai dėl svarbių asmeninių aplinkybių.

 

Krašto apsaugos ministerija skaičiuoja, kad ribojimas palies apie 56.000 žmonių.

 

Apie planuojamus draudimus dar pernai rugsėjį pranešė Nacionalinis krizių valdymo centras. Tuomet KAM projektą žadėjo Vyriausybei pateiki iki metų pabaigos, tačiau teisės akto derinimas užtruko.

 

Oficialų šalių, į kurias draudžiama vykti sąrašą, turėtų parengti Vyriausybė iki įstatymo įsigaliojimo rugsėjo 1 dieną.

 

KAM teigimu, jis turėtų apimtis tas pačias šalis, į kurias draudžiama vykti kariams ar pareigūnams – Rusiją, Baltarusiją ir Kiniją."