I have customized a enter image description heremodel, but when I did the connection like in screenshot, I just get nothing in body request, its only return language. I really want to get the relationship beetwen the entities
NLU by default will not find any entity/relation in the string used as test. If your use case are going to deal with strings like that and you need to understand how the information is related, I would suggest working also with WKS, creating a model specific for your domain (juridic as it seems), then using the NLU with your new model from WKS to get the entities and relations.
Another suggestion, if you only want to test if your code is right, you can use the NLU demo, to see if something would be extracted from the input
Also, never post your API Key.
Related
I'm using watson assistant (plus) and I'm actually fighting with the correct usage of entity usage inside intent examples. First of all, inside the webUI I can't find trace of what mentioned in the documentation about entity suggestions, entity annotation inside intents examples..(we are on frankfurt server).
I have many intents in one skill and I decided to use entity mentions in intents examples. Having no trace of simplified way to add entity inside the single example, I directly wrote it inside the phrase.
From "What I need to activate MySpecificService ABC ?" to "What I need to activate #services:(MySpecificService ABC)", the same syntax used in dialog nodes.
I have used this method diffusely on my skill, according the documentation.
My problems starts here. Assistant refuse to detect the right intent when I try it.
If I ask "What I need to activate MyService Name?" the assistant detect a totally wrong intent, with low confidence (0.40 or less), and the correct intent does not appear neither as 2nd or 3rd intent (it correctly detect the entity).
No similar examples using exaclty #services:(MySpecificService ABC) in other intents, but I used other references to #services or #services:(otherservice name) in other intents.
I read documentation many times, I googled around, watched videos.. but nothing. Evidently I've misunderstood something.
Can You help me?
Intents are the actions/verbs that the user is trying to achieve. In this case, an intent could be the activation itself (no matter what is he trying to activate).
So you should write different examples of an activation question:
"How can I activate my service?", "I need to activate this service", etc.
The entities are the objects/substantives. In your case, services.
So in your dialog, if you are need the assistant to detect the intent+entity. So create a node with the condition #activation && #service:MySpecificService
Be aware that if you have several nodes in your dialog, their order will impact the way that your assistant analyzes the input. If the #activation && #service node is before the #activation && #service:MySpecificService node; the first one will be triggered as "MySpecificService" is one of the #services.
Hope that this helps!
im dealing with entities in intents as well and i think we're also on the frankfurt server.
Since youre on the frankfurt server im pretty sure the reason youre not seeing the annotation options is that youre using german language.
Annotations as mentioned in the documentation is only available for english language (unfortunately)
kr
Could someone point me in the right direction please?
I am trying to extract specific text/numbers from a json payload. I can access/isolate the full string of text by using triggerFormDataValue('text').
The text in question may contain 'sendSMS 1122334455 actual message' as its actual value
Is there anyway, in a logic app flow, to break the text into its component parts?
(sendsms, 1122334455 and actual message)
n.b. I have already tried interacting with the cognitive analysis app for key word searches but that doesn't return the number, nor the full sting, just the key words.
thanks
For more complex logic like the one you have, I would recommend to create an Azure Function. This is a light-weight solution that will offer you the flexibility of a microservice which offers you this possibility.
To extract the numbers, you may use a regular expression.
Edit:
I've found a similar question here on SO, but the conclusion is very similar.
I've done some small research now and it seems Microsoft deliberately does't put too much text parsing functionality in Logic Apps in order to avoid them being too complex. You might have a chance if you put them in JSON notation, but I think the better option would be to go to Azure functions, since it provides reuseability as well.
If that's all you need to do, you can use the split() function. Details: String Functions...split
I have a question about the scalability of getting the many from a one-to-many relationship in parse.com. Below is a diagram of what I am trying to do.
I have a Like object that has a userWhoLiked and a messageLiked attributes as pointers. My question is in regards to checking if a User has liked a message already when loading a feed of Message objects. I was thinking that I could write some cloud code that would return both the Message itself as well as information about if the User has already liked that object. However, I feel like this would be very inefficient. I would in essence have a query for all the Message objects (which will be n objects long), and then another query for finding if the User has already liked that Message object by going through all the Like objects n times and checking the userWhoLiked and messageLiked based on the user logged in and Message I am checking. I am going to use the pointer to build the one-to-many relationship because the number of Like objects will be arbitrarily large. Is the method that I have described (using cloud code and then checking the Like objects ) for getting if a user has liked an object is okay and scalable? Is there a better way, or any suggestions? I appreciate your time. Thanks.
Why not just do one query on Like objects where the userWhoLiked key is equal to the current user? This will return all of the objects which the current user has liked and you can also infer that all objects not included have not been liked.
In case you haven't checked it out yet, I'd highly recommend the Parse Anypic tutorial which has a very similar structure
In my old cakephp 2.x Applications, the password hash was hidden by '*' when I retrieved the data from the User Model. I am not a hundret percent shure, but I think this was done automaticly by Cake.
Now testing Cakephp3.0, I am surprised finding the complete hash when retrieving data from the User Model.
I got a few questions concerning this password-hash-hiding:
Am I right with my opinion this was a function in cakephp2?
Does anyone know, why this function was not implemented in Cakephp3 and why?
If I am wrong by assuming this was included in cake, where is the place to implement this functionality in cake2 and cake3?
Thank you very much for your help.
Am I right with my opinion this was a function in cakephp2?
Yes, in Cake 2.x this is part ot the Debugger, the data itself however is not being touched, just some of the content is being masked when outputting the data.
Does anyone know, why this function was not implemented in Cakephp3 and why?
It is still implemented, but it has been moved. The whole point of this masking thingy was to avoid accidental exposure of datasource credentials (mainly in error messages/pages), it never really had something to do with possible user model data, this is just a side effect for data that happens to use keys like password.
So in 3.x this functionality has been moved to \Cake\Database\Connection::__debugInfo()
https://github.com/cakephp/cakephp/pull/4542
This ensures that you'll still end up with masked credentials when for example debugging connection objects, being it explicitly, or implicitly on error pages, while it doesn't obstruct debugging other data anymore.
[...], where is the place to implement this functionality in [...] cake3?
This highly depends on your use case, if you'd for example wanted to have it masked in debug output, then you could implement it in an overriden __debugInfo() method in your user entity class, similar to how the Connection class is doing it.
https://github.com/cakephp/cakephp/blob/3.0.11/src/Database/Connection.php#L702
Of course this would only work for entities, not for non-hydrated data (array data).
I'm trying to figure out how to get nested structs to work with GAE datastore using Go. I know the datastore doesn't specifically support nested structs. I need to find a simple way of getting user information to go with a post when it is sent out to a user as JSON.
One thing I thought of was to put two fields for the user. One for the ID/key referencing to user and another one for the user type struct which would be added there when the post is loaded from the datastore. Extra fields seem silly so I'm hoping there is a better solution for this.
There are two entity types or structs: POST and USER
Posts need to contain information about the user who made the post.
The structure for the JSON I'm going to output for users is as follows:
POST
field1
field2
USER
user_field1
user_Field2
Go's appengine datastore api provides the PropertyLoadSaver interface for this sort of thing: https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/go/datastore/reference#PropertyLoadSaver
You structure your struct however you want and then implement the Load and Save methods of that interface to populate it correctly. It means you write the serialization code yourself but it gives you full freedom in how you structure your data.
This will allow you still filter over the fields and have a nested struct.
The python runtime has the ndb library which supports nested structures like this. Go does not, so I can think of two solutions:
In the POST kind, have a user field that is a key, referencing a USER kind with the necessary fields. Requires two fetches and roundtrips.
Make a user field in the POST kind that is a blob. The blob is a string that is [de]serialized in go. This means you can't search or filter on any of the user data, but it also allows you to store everything in one entity.
You should use these based on the needs of your app. If you need users to be a real thing, use 1. If users aren't objects you need to work with (i.e., just data to display), you can use 2.