Talk:Software agent

message: Maybe the person who has proposed the merge could state their reasons here? AFAIAC intelligent agents are a subcategory of software agents ... I propose to keep the scope of this page as is, until enough work has been done on the IA subsection to merit splitting it off as its own page ("Intelligent Agent (Software)" phps.?) These are distinct concepts and a merge of two weak pages does not create a strong one.  No longer relevant Steipe (talk) 22:27, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge Software agent with Intelligent agent?

message: This article is a mess!
*It is in desperate need of clear structuring;
*Irrelevant content needs to be deleted;
*Redundancy needs to be removed;
*English grammar needs to be revised;
*Many sentences don't actually make sense.
I plan to revise this article over the weekend (Jan 21/22 2006), if anyone has taken ownership and/or has any stake in this article please comment here. If there are any suggestions on edits, let's hear about them.
-- Steipe 13:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major edit proposals

message: It is my opinion that the Template:Programming paradigms should be kept in this article, however the current version of that template has been causing layout problems to this and other articles. I believe we need to discuss how we can change the layout of that template to better fit the indicated articles. Since this issue involves many articles (and not just this), I propose to centralize this discussion at the template's talk page. If you are interested, please go there and make a suggestion on how we can better solve this problem. Thanks. --Antonielly (talk) 17:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout issue 

message: I added the expert tag back on this article. My concern is that the basic definitions and structure of this article are inconsistent. The introduction defines agents in terms of "representing another's interests" (i.e. agency). The first section seems to be using a definition based on autonomy. The diagram helps explain the relationship between some of the definitions, but the text doesn't really support the diagram.
What I think is needed is an overview of how the term "agent" is used in regard to software. We need to make sure the article captures all the most common uses of the term. It needs to acknowledge that different sources use the term differently. This needs to be in the first few paragraphs. This is the only way to make this article comprehensive and useful to the reader.
The upshot is that we need a number of authoritative sources. CS textbooks, I think, are the best source, since it is their job to be general. Papers from particular institutions or researchers are poor sources, since they tend to enforce a narrow definition that their authors prefer.---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 23:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert tag restored 

message: Just linking to this from the TIBCO Hawk proposed entry, and found that OWL is defined as an example of an intelligent agent!!! Surely a "language" is not an agent (although an agent could use OWL of course)... Isvana (talk) 12:37, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agent References? 

message: I'm curious how the definition of an agent would change in the context of large language models. There's an entire new functionality space enabled by LLM's that directly expand the scope of what is possible with a software agent. Promptrotator (talk) 18:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agents in the context of OpenAI and LLM's