Lesson 4.4 — Conflict Resolution & Fallbacks
Introduction: Navigating the Gray Areas
In an ideal world, every user query would map cleanly to a single intent, and the designated data source would always provide a perfect answer. In the real world, however, things are rarely so simple. Users often express themselves in ambiguous ways, and data sources can sometimes fail or return no relevant results. A robust routing system must be able to gracefully handle these gray areas.
This is where conflict resolution and fallback strategies come into play. Conflict resolution deals with situations where a query could plausibly map to multiple intents. Fallback strategies define what the system should do when the primary path fails to yield a satisfactory result. A well-designed system that anticipates and manages these exceptions is what separates a brittle, frustrating agent from a resilient, helpful one.
This lesson will explore the common challenges of ambiguity and failure in a routing system and provide practical strategies for building in the necessary resilience.
The Challenge of Ambiguity: Conflict Resolution
Ambiguity is a natural part of human language. A user query can often be interpreted in multiple ways, leading to potential conflicts in intent classification. For example, consider the query: "Can you tell me about the new software update?"
This could be interpreted as:
product.release_notes: The user wants to know the specific details of the update.support.troubleshooting: The user is having a problem with the update and needs help.marketing.feature_announcement: The user is interested in the high-level marketing message about the new features.
An effective routing system must have a strategy for resolving this kind of conflict.
Strategies for Conflict Resolution
Clarification Prompt
When the system is uncertain, it asks the user for more information. For example: "Are you looking for the release notes, help with a problem, or a general overview of the new features?"
This is the most user-centric approach and is generally the best practice when the system has low confidence in its initial classification.
Prioritization Rules
The system can be configured with rules that prioritize one intent over another in cases of conflict. For example, a rule might state that a support.troubleshooting intent should always take precedence over a marketing.feature_announcement intent.
Useful for situations where there is a clear business reason to prioritize one type of request over another (e.g., always prioritize a sales inquiry).
Multi-Intent Routing
In some cases, the best approach is to retrieve information for all possible intents and then use a secondary ranking step to determine the best answer.
This can be effective but is also more computationally expensive. It is best used when the potential intents are closely related.
The Challenge of Failure: Fallback Strategies
Even when an intent is classified correctly, the designated data source may not always provide a useful answer. The data source might be temporarily unavailable, or it might simply not contain the requested information. A resilient system must have a plan for what to do next.
Strategies for Fallbacks
Secondary Source Retrieval
As discussed in the previous lesson, the system can be configured to try a secondary data source if the primary source fails.
This is a simple and effective way to build redundancy into your system.
Query Relaxation
If an initial query is too specific and returns no results, the system can automatically broaden the search. For example, if a search for "blue shoes size 10" returns nothing, the system could relax the query to "blue shoes".
Useful for situations where the user's query might be too narrow.
Proactive Suggestions
If the system cannot find a direct answer, it can suggest related topics or questions that it can answer. For example: "I couldn't find any information about the 'X' feature, but I can tell you about the 'Y' feature."
This can be a helpful way to guide the user towards a productive conversation, even when their initial query fails.
Human Escalation
When all else fails, the system should have a clear and seamless process for escalating the conversation to a human agent.
This is the ultimate fallback and is essential for any business-critical application.
Conclusion: Building a Resilient System
Conflict resolution and fallback strategies are not edge cases; they are essential components of any robust and user-friendly AI agent. By anticipating ambiguity and failure, you can design a system that is more resilient, more helpful, and ultimately more intelligent. A system that knows what to do when it doesn't know the answer is often more valuable than one that only works in ideal conditions.
In the next lesson, we will explore how to quantify uncertainty in our routing system by using confidence thresholds and escalation logic. We will learn how to use the confidence scores from our intent classification model to make more intelligent routing decisions.
Last updated