Archive for the ‘Information retrieval’ Category

February 9th, 2010 - 9:52 pm § in Information retrieval

How we categorise nouns

I read about some research today that is both inspiring and exciting. I’ve always been hugely interested in how humans deal with words in their heads and finally we have some interesting answers. This made me play with keyword research and think about how (un)intuitive our methods are right no[...]

September 7th, 2009 - 9:35 pm § in Information retrieval

Evaluating search engines

Today we have quite a wide choice of information retrieval systems ranging from Google, Bing, Kosmix, Duck Duck Go, Cognition and so many more. We all have the engine we use 90% of the time I’d estimate, but is it really the best engine? It might be the best for us personally or for a [...][...]

August 10th, 2009 - 11:01 am § in Information retrieval

Processing Twitter data

I came across this presentation by the National Library of Medicine and thought it was a great insight into working with Twitter data. They looked at tracking the H1N1 virus using the MEDLINE prototype. MEDLINE is the National Library of Medicine’s online library that contains 11 million cita[...]

July 18th, 2009 - 5:44 pm § in Information retrieval

Assisted search

There’s a post over at Search Engine Land by Kim Krause Berg which highlights recent research being done in search and use behaviour. It’s a nice short summary, very accessible and quotes some pretty authoritative sources such as Jim Jansen for example. I wanted to post about this becaus[...]

July 17th, 2009 - 2:12 am § in Information retrieval

Stemmer: the Ruby version

For those of you interested in NLP stuff, you might know about the Uea-Lite stemmer that I made back in 2005. Jason Adams from the “Mendicant Bug” has made a Ruby port which I’m really pleased about. Now we have my original Perl version, a Java version and a Ruby version Thanks J[...]

July 3rd, 2009 - 12:58 am § in Information retrieval

Microsoft and Information Retrieval

With the advent of Bing and the fact that it works really well, people are starting to take Microsoft seriously in the search domain. The previous offerings were not as strong as Google and with Google being such a behemoth in search, it was going to take a fair bit to even cause a tremor. [...][...]

June 24th, 2009 - 12:09 pm § in Information retrieval

New post at SEP

Just to let you know that I blogged over at search Engine People. The post is called “5 Common Information Retrieval Myths“. I get a lot of questions sent to my via social networks and email, and I find myself correcting the same things a lot of the time so I thought I would write [...][...]

June 11th, 2009 - 2:04 pm § in Information retrieval

Extracting meaning from content: progress

I’m excited when I come across news like this because it’s my area of research. MIT covered this and presented TextRunner, a system capable of extracting meaning from billions of documents. It is not new, but it is working a lot better now which is why it’s exciting. It’s act[...]

April 15th, 2009 - 4:08 pm § in Information retrieval, Search engines, Semantic web

Off with your meta-tags

I wanted to talk about how computers deal with text, or rather how they deal with what text means.  Todd Mintz posted about Google returning something other than the meta-description he had supplied for example. In an ideal world, there would be no need for meta-tags as machines could understand th[...]





© 2009-2013 Science for SEO All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright

SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline

Twitter links powered by Tweet This v1.8.1, a WordPress plugin for Twitter.