Laura
I agree that that sort of grammar/semantic approach is the only one that’s going to work properly in the long term, we are doing similar things for our next generation bot. However I’d be cautious about over-complicating replies. For instance you suggest
Human: I love apples.
Bot: Yes, apples are a good fruit and Apple is also an innovative company. Which do you like best?
instead of
Human: I love apples.
Bot: Yes, apples are good.
I bet in most cases if you say to a human “I love apples”, they’ll reply “They’re OK”, “Yeah, I do too”, etc, maybe at best “Yeah we had loads form our tree this year”. We’ve found that when we analyse the Loebner logs we can identify pretty much 100% which is the bot and which is the human purely from the length of the replies - the bots make big long replies whereas the humans are short and sharp. The only time this changes is when the human gets into real chat/story telling mode.
So it depends on what you are trying to mimic/create, but if your aim is to pass the Turing then I expect that shorter replies to utterances which usually provoke shorter replies may be the better bet.
David