{ "query": "You are a super intelligent assistant. Please answer all my questions precisely and comprehensively.\n\nThrough our system KIOS you have a Knowledge Base named v5 with all the informations that the user requests. In this knowledge base are following Documents ChatBot_Studie_Stromanbieter_Dokumentation_VORAB_FINAL.pdf\n\nThis is the initial message to start the chat. Based on the following summary/context you should formulate an initial message greeting the user with the following user name male lance+flt@digirift.com lance+flt@digirift.com tell them that you are the AI Chatbot Simon using the Large Language Model gemini-1.5-flash to answer all questions.\n\nFormulate the initial message in the Usersettings Language German\n\nPlease use the following context to suggest some questions or topics to chat about this knowledge base. List at least 3-10 possible topics or suggestions up and use emojis. The chat should be professional and in business terms. At the end ask an open question what the user would like to check on the list \n\n This document is a study on electricity providers in Germany conducted in 2020. The study focuses on two main aspects: service and conditions. \n\n**Page 1**\n\nThis page provides a visual overview of the study, highlighting its focus on transparency and customer proximity. The images depict various aspects of customer interaction, including consultation, customer service, and family satisfaction. The text emphasizes the confidential nature of the preliminary version and identifies the commissioning party as \"xyz.\"\n\n**Page 2**\n\nThis page states that the documentation is subject to a protective fee of 400 Euros (excluding VAT).\n\n**Page 3**\n\nThis page provides information about the market research institute that conducted the study. It is a privately owned, consumer-oriented, and independent institute based in Hamburg, Germany. The institute was founded in June 2006 and aims to create transparency and improve service quality in Germany. It employs a team of experts from various fields and over 2,000 trained testers across Germany.\n\n**Page 4 & 5**\n\nThese pages contain the table of contents for the study, outlining the topics covered and their corresponding page numbers. The study includes sections on key figures, conclusions, top-performing companies, overall results, industry strengths and weaknesses, methodology, and an appendix.\n\n**Page 6 & 7**\n\nThese pages present key figures and facts about the study. The study was commissioned by a news channel and covered 34 electricity providers. It was conducted between October 2019 and February 2020 and was developed in collaboration with a professor. The study analyzed both service and conditions, with service being evaluated through mystery tests (1,044 service contacts in total) and conditions being assessed based on prices and contract terms of the cheapest electricity tariffs in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich (as of January 7, 2020). The weighting of different service and condition aspects is also provided.\n\n**Page 8**\n\nThis page summarizes the main findings of the study. Green electricity providers performed better overall, achieving a good rating (73.0 points) compared to the satisfactory rating (65.7 points) of traditional providers. Price comparisons were recommended due to significant price differences between providers. Customers using basic supply tariffs could save up to 19.5% by switching providers. Green electricity tariffs were not always more expensive, with the cheapest providers in the study being green electricity providers. Traditional providers often failed to respond to email inquiries or provided incomplete answers. Telephone consultations were not much better. Websites were the best source of information, offering clear content, tariff calculators, and online contract conclusion options. Long contract terms were rare, and price guarantees usually only covered the energy cost component.\n\n**Page 9, 10 & 11**\n\nThese pages list the top-performing companies in the study, both overall and within the categories of green electricity providers and traditional electricity providers. Knauber Strom was the top performer overall, followed by Team Energie and Stadtwerke Flensburg.\n\n**Page 12, 13 & 14**\n\nThese pages present the overall results of the study, ranking all 34 electricity providers based on their total score. The scores are presented on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the highest achievable score. The results are further broken down into service and conditions scores.\n\n**Page 15**\n\nThis page highlights the top three electricity providers in the study: Knauber Strom, Team Energie, and Stadtwerke Flensburg. It provides a brief description of their strengths and why they achieved high rankings.\n\n**Page 16 & 17**\n\nThese pages present the results specifically for green electricity providers, ranking them based on their total score, service score, and conditions score.\n\n**Page 18 & 19**\n\nThese pages present the results specifically for traditional electricity providers, ranking them based on their total score, service score, and conditions score.\n\n**Page 20**\n\nThis page highlights three additional top-performing providers: Sauber Energie, Ovag Energie, and Roth Energie. It provides a brief description of their strengths and why they achieved high rankings.\n\n**Page 21, 22 & 23**\n\nThese pages analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the electricity provider industry as a whole, as well as within the categories of green electricity providers and traditional electricity providers. The analysis is based on scores for different service aspects (telephone service, email service, website) and conditions (prices, contract terms).\n\n**Page 24 & 25**\n\nThese pages provide a more detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of telephone service and email service across the industry.\n\n**Page 26**\n\nThis page provides a detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of website performance across the industry.\n\n**Page 27 & 28**\n\nThese pages analyze the price differences between providers and the common contract terms offered.\n\n**Page 29, 30 & 31**\n\nThese pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their service performance, broken down into telephone service, email service, and website performance.\n\n**Page 32, 33 & 34**\n\nThese pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their conditions, broken down into prices and contract terms.\n\n**Page 35 & 36**\n\nThese pages provide background information on the study, explaining the motivation for conducting it and the selection criteria for the 34 electricity providers included.\n\n**Page 37**\n\nThis page describes the role-playing scenarios used in the mystery tests for evaluating telephone and email service.\n\n**Page 38, 39 & 40**\n\nThese pages list the specific criteria used to evaluate telephone service, including sub-criteria for assessing consulting competence, solution quality, communication quality, waiting times and accessibility, and consulting experience.\n\n**Page 41**\n\nThis page lists the specific criteria used to evaluate email service, including sub-criteria for assessing consulting competence, solution quality, communication quality, waiting times and accessibility, and consulting experience.\n\n**Page 42 & 43**\n\nThese pages list the specific criteria used to evaluate website performance, including sub-criteria for assessing content, special information and functions, general information, and contact information.\n\n**Page 44**\n\nThis page lists the specific criteria used for the user evaluation of websites, including sub-criteria for assessing user-friendliness and content.\n\n**Page 45 & 46**\n\nThese pages list the contact channels (telephone number, email address/contact form, website) tested for each electricity provider, along with the testing period.\n\n**Page 47 & 48**\n\nThese pages describe the methodology used for analyzing the conditions offered by electricity providers, including the data collection process, the types of tariffs considered, and the scoring system for prices.\n\n**Page 49**\n\nThis page lists the specific criteria used to evaluate the conditions offered by electricity providers, including sub-criteria for assessing prices in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich, as well as contract terms.\n\n**Page 50**\n\nThis page lists the sections included in the appendix of the study.\n\n**Page 51 & 52**\n\nThese pages provide examples of positive and negative experiences reported by the testers during the mystery tests.\n\n**Page 53 & 54**\n\nThese pages list the cheapest electricity tariff offered by each provider as of January 7, 2020.\n\n**Page 55 & 56**\n\nThese pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their telephone service performance, broken down into various sub-criteria.\n\n**Page 57 & 58**\n\nThese pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their email service performance, broken down into various sub-criteria.\n\n**Page 59 & 60**\n\nThese pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their website performance, broken down into various sub-criteria.\n\n**Page 61, 62 & 63**\n\nThese pages present the costs of the cheapest electricity tariffs offered by each provider in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich, respectively, for different annual consumption levels.\n\n**Page 64 & 65**\n\nThese pages describe the general methodology used for the service tests, including the objectives, basis, analysis approach, data collection method, mystery activities, internet analysis, and main evaluation criteria.\n\nIn conclusion, this study provides a comprehensive evaluation of electricity providers in Germany, focusing on both service and conditions. The results highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the industry as a whole, as well as individual providers. The study also provides valuable insights for consumers looking to choose an electricity provider that best meets their needs.\n", "namespace": "97b72774-0d7d-442f-99d8-dd83b1b7de29", "messages": [ { "role": "assistant", "content": "\n\nget_initial_message_with_summary\n\n FOR ADDITIONAL CONTEXT:\n\nKnowledgebase name: v5\nKnowledgebase files:\nChatBot_Studie_Stromanbieter_Dokumentation_VORAB_FINAL.pdf\nKnowledgebases crawlers:\n" } ], "stream": true, "language_level": "", "chat_channel": ":4148:1727417986846", "language": "German", "tone": "neutral", "writing_style": "standard", "model": "gemini-1.5-flash", "knowledgebase": "ki-dev-large", "seed": 1029, "client_id": 1727417986846, "all_context": false, "follow_up_for": null, "knowledgebase_files_count": 1, "override_command": null, "disable_clarity_check": false, "custom_primer": "", "logging": true, "query_route": "" } INITIALIZATION Knowledgebase: ki-dev-large Base Query: You are a super intelligent assistant. Please answer all my questions precisely and comprehensively. Through our system KIOS you have a Knowledge Base named v5 with all the informations that the user requests. In this knowledge base are following Documents ChatBot_Studie_Stromanbieter_Dokumentation_VORAB_FINAL.pdf This is the initial message to start the chat. Based on the following summary/context you should formulate an initial message greeting the user with the following user name male lance+flt@digirift.com lance+flt@digirift.com tell them that you are the AI Chatbot Simon using the Large Language Model gemini-1.5-flash to answer all questions. Formulate the initial message in the Usersettings Language German Please use the following context to suggest some questions or topics to chat about this knowledge base. List at least 3-10 possible topics or suggestions up and use emojis. The chat should be professional and in business terms. At the end ask an open question what the user would like to check on the list This document is a study on electricity providers in Germany conducted in 2020. The study focuses on two main aspects: service and conditions. **Page 1** This page provides a visual overview of the study, highlighting its focus on transparency and customer proximity. The images depict various aspects of customer interaction, including consultation, customer service, and family satisfaction. The text emphasizes the confidential nature of the preliminary version and identifies the commissioning party as "xyz." **Page 2** This page states that the documentation is subject to a protective fee of 400 Euros (excluding VAT). **Page 3** This page provides information about the market research institute that conducted the study. It is a privately owned, consumer-oriented, and independent institute based in Hamburg, Germany. The institute was founded in June 2006 and aims to create transparency and improve service quality in Germany. It employs a team of experts from various fields and over 2,000 trained testers across Germany. **Page 4 & 5** These pages contain the table of contents for the study, outlining the topics covered and their corresponding page numbers. The study includes sections on key figures, conclusions, top-performing companies, overall results, industry strengths and weaknesses, methodology, and an appendix. **Page 6 & 7** These pages present key figures and facts about the study. The study was commissioned by a news channel and covered 34 electricity providers. It was conducted between October 2019 and February 2020 and was developed in collaboration with a professor. The study analyzed both service and conditions, with service being evaluated through mystery tests (1,044 service contacts in total) and conditions being assessed based on prices and contract terms of the cheapest electricity tariffs in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich (as of January 7, 2020). The weighting of different service and condition aspects is also provided. **Page 8** This page summarizes the main findings of the study. Green electricity providers performed better overall, achieving a good rating (73.0 points) compared to the satisfactory rating (65.7 points) of traditional providers. Price comparisons were recommended due to significant price differences between providers. Customers using basic supply tariffs could save up to 19.5% by switching providers. Green electricity tariffs were not always more expensive, with the cheapest providers in the study being green electricity providers. Traditional providers often failed to respond to email inquiries or provided incomplete answers. Telephone consultations were not much better. Websites were the best source of information, offering clear content, tariff calculators, and online contract conclusion options. Long contract terms were rare, and price guarantees usually only covered the energy cost component. **Page 9, 10 & 11** These pages list the top-performing companies in the study, both overall and within the categories of green electricity providers and traditional electricity providers. Knauber Strom was the top performer overall, followed by Team Energie and Stadtwerke Flensburg. **Page 12, 13 & 14** These pages present the overall results of the study, ranking all 34 electricity providers based on their total score. The scores are presented on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the highest achievable score. The results are further broken down into service and conditions scores. **Page 15** This page highlights the top three electricity providers in the study: Knauber Strom, Team Energie, and Stadtwerke Flensburg. It provides a brief description of their strengths and why they achieved high rankings. **Page 16 & 17** These pages present the results specifically for green electricity providers, ranking them based on their total score, service score, and conditions score. **Page 18 & 19** These pages present the results specifically for traditional electricity providers, ranking them based on their total score, service score, and conditions score. **Page 20** This page highlights three additional top-performing providers: Sauber Energie, Ovag Energie, and Roth Energie. It provides a brief description of their strengths and why they achieved high rankings. **Page 21, 22 & 23** These pages analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the electricity provider industry as a whole, as well as within the categories of green electricity providers and traditional electricity providers. The analysis is based on scores for different service aspects (telephone service, email service, website) and conditions (prices, contract terms). **Page 24 & 25** These pages provide a more detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of telephone service and email service across the industry. **Page 26** This page provides a detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of website performance across the industry. **Page 27 & 28** These pages analyze the price differences between providers and the common contract terms offered. **Page 29, 30 & 31** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their service performance, broken down into telephone service, email service, and website performance. **Page 32, 33 & 34** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their conditions, broken down into prices and contract terms. **Page 35 & 36** These pages provide background information on the study, explaining the motivation for conducting it and the selection criteria for the 34 electricity providers included. **Page 37** This page describes the role-playing scenarios used in the mystery tests for evaluating telephone and email service. **Page 38, 39 & 40** These pages list the specific criteria used to evaluate telephone service, including sub-criteria for assessing consulting competence, solution quality, communication quality, waiting times and accessibility, and consulting experience. **Page 41** This page lists the specific criteria used to evaluate email service, including sub-criteria for assessing consulting competence, solution quality, communication quality, waiting times and accessibility, and consulting experience. **Page 42 & 43** These pages list the specific criteria used to evaluate website performance, including sub-criteria for assessing content, special information and functions, general information, and contact information. **Page 44** This page lists the specific criteria used for the user evaluation of websites, including sub-criteria for assessing user-friendliness and content. **Page 45 & 46** These pages list the contact channels (telephone number, email address/contact form, website) tested for each electricity provider, along with the testing period. **Page 47 & 48** These pages describe the methodology used for analyzing the conditions offered by electricity providers, including the data collection process, the types of tariffs considered, and the scoring system for prices. **Page 49** This page lists the specific criteria used to evaluate the conditions offered by electricity providers, including sub-criteria for assessing prices in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich, as well as contract terms. **Page 50** This page lists the sections included in the appendix of the study. **Page 51 & 52** These pages provide examples of positive and negative experiences reported by the testers during the mystery tests. **Page 53 & 54** These pages list the cheapest electricity tariff offered by each provider as of January 7, 2020. **Page 55 & 56** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their telephone service performance, broken down into various sub-criteria. **Page 57 & 58** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their email service performance, broken down into various sub-criteria. **Page 59 & 60** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their website performance, broken down into various sub-criteria. **Page 61, 62 & 63** These pages present the costs of the cheapest electricity tariffs offered by each provider in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich, respectively, for different annual consumption levels. **Page 64 & 65** These pages describe the general methodology used for the service tests, including the objectives, basis, analysis approach, data collection method, mystery activities, internet analysis, and main evaluation criteria. In conclusion, this study provides a comprehensive evaluation of electricity providers in Germany, focusing on both service and conditions. The results highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the industry as a whole, as well as individual providers. The study also provides valuable insights for consumers looking to choose an electricity provider that best meets their needs. Model: gemini-1.5-flash **Elapsed Time: 0.00 seconds** ROUTING Query type: simple_conversation **Elapsed Time: 1.80 seconds** PRIMER Primer: You are Simon, a highly intelligent personal assistant in a system called KIOS. You are a chatbot that can read knowledgebases through the "CONTEXT" that is included in the user's chat message. You are a conversational bot, an intelligent system designed to interact with the user. Respond courteously to the message of the user. To keep the conversation going, ask the user if there is any specific information they would like to know at the end of your message. **Elapsed Time: 0.14 seconds** FINAL QUERY Final Query: You are a super intelligent assistant. Please answer all my questions precisely and comprehensively. Through our system KIOS you have a Knowledge Base named v5 with all the informations that the user requests. In this knowledge base are following Documents ChatBot_Studie_Stromanbieter_Dokumentation_VORAB_FINAL.pdf This is the initial message to start the chat. Based on the following summary/context you should formulate an initial message greeting the user with the following user name male lance+flt@digirift.com lance+flt@digirift.com tell them that you are the AI Chatbot Simon using the Large Language Model gemini-1.5-flash to answer all questions. Formulate the initial message in the Usersettings Language German Please use the following context to suggest some questions or topics to chat about this knowledge base. List at least 3-10 possible topics or suggestions up and use emojis. The chat should be professional and in business terms. At the end ask an open question what the user would like to check on the list This document is a study on electricity providers in Germany conducted in 2020. The study focuses on two main aspects: service and conditions. **Page 1** This page provides a visual overview of the study, highlighting its focus on transparency and customer proximity. The images depict various aspects of customer interaction, including consultation, customer service, and family satisfaction. The text emphasizes the confidential nature of the preliminary version and identifies the commissioning party as "xyz." **Page 2** This page states that the documentation is subject to a protective fee of 400 Euros (excluding VAT). **Page 3** This page provides information about the market research institute that conducted the study. It is a privately owned, consumer-oriented, and independent institute based in Hamburg, Germany. The institute was founded in June 2006 and aims to create transparency and improve service quality in Germany. It employs a team of experts from various fields and over 2,000 trained testers across Germany. **Page 4 & 5** These pages contain the table of contents for the study, outlining the topics covered and their corresponding page numbers. The study includes sections on key figures, conclusions, top-performing companies, overall results, industry strengths and weaknesses, methodology, and an appendix. **Page 6 & 7** These pages present key figures and facts about the study. The study was commissioned by a news channel and covered 34 electricity providers. It was conducted between October 2019 and February 2020 and was developed in collaboration with a professor. The study analyzed both service and conditions, with service being evaluated through mystery tests (1,044 service contacts in total) and conditions being assessed based on prices and contract terms of the cheapest electricity tariffs in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich (as of January 7, 2020). The weighting of different service and condition aspects is also provided. **Page 8** This page summarizes the main findings of the study. Green electricity providers performed better overall, achieving a good rating (73.0 points) compared to the satisfactory rating (65.7 points) of traditional providers. Price comparisons were recommended due to significant price differences between providers. Customers using basic supply tariffs could save up to 19.5% by switching providers. Green electricity tariffs were not always more expensive, with the cheapest providers in the study being green electricity providers. Traditional providers often failed to respond to email inquiries or provided incomplete answers. Telephone consultations were not much better. Websites were the best source of information, offering clear content, tariff calculators, and online contract conclusion options. Long contract terms were rare, and price guarantees usually only covered the energy cost component. **Page 9, 10 & 11** These pages list the top-performing companies in the study, both overall and within the categories of green electricity providers and traditional electricity providers. Knauber Strom was the top performer overall, followed by Team Energie and Stadtwerke Flensburg. **Page 12, 13 & 14** These pages present the overall results of the study, ranking all 34 electricity providers based on their total score. The scores are presented on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the highest achievable score. The results are further broken down into service and conditions scores. **Page 15** This page highlights the top three electricity providers in the study: Knauber Strom, Team Energie, and Stadtwerke Flensburg. It provides a brief description of their strengths and why they achieved high rankings. **Page 16 & 17** These pages present the results specifically for green electricity providers, ranking them based on their total score, service score, and conditions score. **Page 18 & 19** These pages present the results specifically for traditional electricity providers, ranking them based on their total score, service score, and conditions score. **Page 20** This page highlights three additional top-performing providers: Sauber Energie, Ovag Energie, and Roth Energie. It provides a brief description of their strengths and why they achieved high rankings. **Page 21, 22 & 23** These pages analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the electricity provider industry as a whole, as well as within the categories of green electricity providers and traditional electricity providers. The analysis is based on scores for different service aspects (telephone service, email service, website) and conditions (prices, contract terms). **Page 24 & 25** These pages provide a more detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of telephone service and email service across the industry. **Page 26** This page provides a detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of website performance across the industry. **Page 27 & 28** These pages analyze the price differences between providers and the common contract terms offered. **Page 29, 30 & 31** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their service performance, broken down into telephone service, email service, and website performance. **Page 32, 33 & 34** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their conditions, broken down into prices and contract terms. **Page 35 & 36** These pages provide background information on the study, explaining the motivation for conducting it and the selection criteria for the 34 electricity providers included. **Page 37** This page describes the role-playing scenarios used in the mystery tests for evaluating telephone and email service. **Page 38, 39 & 40** These pages list the specific criteria used to evaluate telephone service, including sub-criteria for assessing consulting competence, solution quality, communication quality, waiting times and accessibility, and consulting experience. **Page 41** This page lists the specific criteria used to evaluate email service, including sub-criteria for assessing consulting competence, solution quality, communication quality, waiting times and accessibility, and consulting experience. **Page 42 & 43** These pages list the specific criteria used to evaluate website performance, including sub-criteria for assessing content, special information and functions, general information, and contact information. **Page 44** This page lists the specific criteria used for the user evaluation of websites, including sub-criteria for assessing user-friendliness and content. **Page 45 & 46** These pages list the contact channels (telephone number, email address/contact form, website) tested for each electricity provider, along with the testing period. **Page 47 & 48** These pages describe the methodology used for analyzing the conditions offered by electricity providers, including the data collection process, the types of tariffs considered, and the scoring system for prices. **Page 49** This page lists the specific criteria used to evaluate the conditions offered by electricity providers, including sub-criteria for assessing prices in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich, as well as contract terms. **Page 50** This page lists the sections included in the appendix of the study. **Page 51 & 52** These pages provide examples of positive and negative experiences reported by the testers during the mystery tests. **Page 53 & 54** These pages list the cheapest electricity tariff offered by each provider as of January 7, 2020. **Page 55 & 56** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their telephone service performance, broken down into various sub-criteria. **Page 57 & 58** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their email service performance, broken down into various sub-criteria. **Page 59 & 60** These pages present the detailed results for each electricity provider in terms of their website performance, broken down into various sub-criteria. **Page 61, 62 & 63** These pages present the costs of the cheapest electricity tariffs offered by each provider in Berlin, Hamburg, and Munich, respectively, for different annual consumption levels. **Page 64 & 65** These pages describe the general methodology used for the service tests, including the objectives, basis, analysis approach, data collection method, mystery activities, internet analysis, and main evaluation criteria. In conclusion, this study provides a comprehensive evaluation of electricity providers in Germany, focusing on both service and conditions. The results highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the industry as a whole, as well as individual providers. The study also provides valuable insights for consumers looking to choose an electricity provider that best meets their needs. Important: Take a look at the QUERY and only the QUERY. Please try always to answer the query question. If the client ask for a formatting structure follow his advise. But if the questions is vague or unclear ask a follow-up question based on the context. Try to support the customer give him also suggestions as a list of multiple suggestions at least 3-6 what he can also ask as related questions or follow-up questions. Final Files Sources: ================================================== **Elapsed Time: 0.00 seconds** ================================================== FINAL ANSWER Answer: test ================================================== **Elapsed Time: 2.89 seconds** ==================================================