Oh my goodness -- isn't this exactly what we do when we "tweak" our
relevance ranking algorithms in our own systems? We call it the "On the
road" tweak -- doing what we need to do to make this obvious titles
appear on the first page of the results preferably near the very top.
You could also call it the "Gone with the wind" tweak or even the
"Nature" tweak. We worked hard to make sure that the algorithm placed
titles with just those words high in the ranking because we think that
most users would more highly value works in which their search words
were the predominant contents of the title. And because our interface
committee wanted it this way. I don't think we would be accused of
anything nefarious.
Everything about Google's algorithm is due to human judgment and a lot
of that is to compensate for human behavior by website owners to game
the system to try to rise higher in the algorithm. And then they tweak
the algorithm again and the game playing starts anew.
- Michele
On 12/6/2010 2:10 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> Of COURSE Google's algorithms are the result of subjective human
> judgements in how to best apply available technology to meet user
> needs. This should surprise nobody that knows that software isn't
> magic, it just does exactly what programmers tell it to.
>
> Our own library software and data is the same thing. Google tends to
> be pretty good at it, which is why we all use it every day.
>
> What is the big shocking thing here supposed to be?
>
> Certainly if libraries want to take 'information literacy' seriously,
> we should be trying to educate our patrons in this too. Google is just
> a human endeavor, it's not somehow infallible. If even people inside
> the library world find this a shocker, that is not encouraging.
>
> On 12/3/2010 6:29 AM, Weinheimer Jim wrote:
>> Quoting from myself (sorry about that everyone!)
>> <snip>
>> In response to this story, Google tweaked their results, see "Google
>> Changes Search Results After Story About Misleading Retailer
>> Rankings"
>> http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/12/02/131753456/google-changes-search-results-after-story-about-retailer-rankings?ft=1&f=1001,
>> so things apparently work differently now, but of course, what the
>> tweaks did to other searches remains to be seen, and in any case
>> Google changes must remain secret.....
>> </snip>
>>
>> I just wanted to point out some new discussions on this, which are
>> becoming very interesting from the information management point of
>> view. See "Google admits its algorithm is opinion; but its decision
>> process is dangerous"
>> http://blog.seattlepi.com/zennieabraham/archives/230477.asp which
>> discusses Google's reasoning for the "tweaks", as debated on John
>> Battelle's blog post "In Google's Opinion...." with Matt Cutts, a
>> Google "engineer"
>> http://battellemedia.com/archives/2010/12/in_googles_opinion
>>
>> Mr. Cutts wrote:
>> "...I believe the "opinion" in that sentence refers to the fact our
>> web search results are protected speech in the First Amendment sense.
>> Court cases in the U.S. (search for SearchKing or Kinderstart) have
>> ruled that Google's search results are opinion. This particular
>> situation serves to demonstrate that fact: Google decided to write an
>> algorithm to tackle the issue reported in the New York Times. We
>> chose which signals to incorporate and how to blend them...."
>>
>> Very interesting.
>>
>> James Weinheimer j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu
>> Director of Library and Information Services
>> The American University of Rome
>> via Pietro Roselli, 4
>> 00153 Rome, Italy
>> voice- 011 39 06 58330919 ext. 258
>> fax-011 39 06 58330992
>> First Thus: http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
>> Cooperative Cataloging Rules:
>> http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
>>
>
--
~NOTE EMAIL ADDRESS CHANGE TO FCLMIN_at_UFL.EDU~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michele Newberry Assistant Director for Library Services
Florida Center for Library Automation 352-392-9020
5830 NW 39th Avenue 352-392-9185 (fax)
Gainesville, FL 32606 fclmin_at_ufl.edu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Received on Mon Dec 06 2010 - 14:59:50 EST