iGaming AI support vendors use inconsistent resolution metrics, industry told
AI vendors advertise varying automation rates, but the same deployment can report different percentages depending on the metric used.
Competing metrics confuse performance claims
AI support vendors in iGaming advertise different resolution metrics, with some claiming 70% automation, 80% resolution, or 90% handled without human intervention, according to industry commentary.
The same AI deployment can report 85% containment, 70% automation, and 55% true resolution depending on which metric is quoted, the analysis found.
Containment versus resolution
Containment counts conversations that never reached a human agent, including players who give up and close the chat or ask the same question the next day, the commentary explained.
Resolution should mean the issue was fixed and the player did not come back about it within a set window, typically three to seven days, according to the analysis.
Withdrawal complaints dominate regulator data
The UK Gambling Commission’s complaints data has shown withdrawals and financial transactions as the largest single category of complaints made to the regulator.
Call for standardised definition
The author calls for operators, platforms, and vendors to agree on one public definition of AI resolution for player support with a fixed re-contact window and per-category reporting for payments, KYC, bonuses, and responsible gambling.
Sources
- European Gaming · Industry media · primary source ·
Spotted a mistake? Report an error — see our corrections policy.