Comments on: Up Close With Google Squared & Some Wolfram Alpha Thoughts http://searchengineland.com/up-close-google-squared-19313 Search Engine Land: Must Read News About Search Marketing & Search Engines Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:39:12 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: noodlesquares http://searchengineland.com/up-close-google-squared-19313/comment-page-1#comment-5699 noodlesquares Mon, 01 Jun 2009 01:09:32 +0000 http://searchengineland.com/?p=19313#comment-5699 This is really impressive but still can't come anywhere close to something with human intelligence mixed in. Compare the search engines square to http://noodlesquares.com/html/squareSearchEngines.html. [Disclaimer: associated with noodlesquares.com] This is really impressive but still can’t come anywhere close to something with human intelligence mixed in. Compare the search engines square to http://noodlesquares.com/html/squareSearchEngines.html. [Disclaimer: associated with noodlesquares.com]

]]> By: Winooski http://searchengineland.com/up-close-google-squared-19313/comment-page-1#comment-5587 Winooski Fri, 15 May 2009 16:36:29 +0000 http://searchengineland.com/?p=19313#comment-5587 Great coverage. Thanks Danny! "Google Squared, in a way, goes one better than what Wolfram Alpha is doing. Wolfram’s data comes from taking in structured data. As a result, there are lots of questions it doesn’t know about. And while the human curation of this data helps in accuracy, doing a search and coming up with nothing is a disquieting feeling." I don't know if "goes one better" is appropriate in this context. It's the old "accuracy vs. breadth" issue, right? You note how there are plenty of queries for which Google Squared comes up with results, yes, but not-that-great ones. So which is really better: Giving the searcher a result regardless of relevancy/accuracy, or giving the searcher a result only if the tool has sufficient confidence of its relevancy? Great coverage. Thanks Danny!

“Google Squared, in a way, goes one better than what Wolfram Alpha is doing. Wolfram’s data comes from taking in structured data. As a result, there are lots of questions it doesn’t know about. And while the human curation of this data helps in accuracy, doing a search and coming up with nothing is a disquieting feeling.”

I don’t know if “goes one better” is appropriate in this context. It’s the old “accuracy vs. breadth” issue, right? You note how there are plenty of queries for which Google Squared comes up with results, yes, but not-that-great ones. So which is really better: Giving the searcher a result regardless of relevancy/accuracy, or giving the searcher a result only if the tool has sufficient confidence of its relevancy?

]]> By: eg http://searchengineland.com/up-close-google-squared-19313/comment-page-1#comment-5584 eg Fri, 15 May 2009 13:59:40 +0000 http://searchengineland.com/?p=19313#comment-5584 Did you take the screenshots with a camera phone? Sorry. Did you take the screenshots with a camera phone? Sorry.

]]> By: JoelDowns http://searchengineland.com/up-close-google-squared-19313/comment-page-1#comment-5574 JoelDowns Fri, 15 May 2009 00:02:03 +0000 http://searchengineland.com/?p=19313#comment-5574 It seems to me that you can't directly compare Wolfram Alpha and Google Squared - GS is tailored to give you list of things with their associated metadata to help you find the thing or things you're looking for, while Wolfram Alpha is built to give you in-depth information about a single thing. They serve different needs, and both would augment Google's core functionality quite nicely. That said, I'm much more impressed with Google's technology in its ability to infer meaning from structured or semistructured data that it crawls while Wolfram is getting data meanings the old-fashioned way - a bunch of people at keyboards. It seems to me that you can’t directly compare Wolfram Alpha and Google Squared – GS is tailored to give you list of things with their associated metadata to help you find the thing or things you’re looking for, while Wolfram Alpha is built to give you in-depth information about a single thing. They serve different needs, and both would augment Google’s core functionality quite nicely. That said, I’m much more impressed with Google’s technology in its ability to infer meaning from structured or semistructured data that it crawls while Wolfram is getting data meanings the old-fashioned way – a bunch of people at keyboards.

]]>