LogicMan - 4:12 am on Oct 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>doc_Z states
>>Possible explanations are .... Google changed their PR calculation scheme. It seems that they used the Jacobian iteration scheme (mentioned in the original papers) in the past. They might change this scheme. However, they either didn’t perform enough iterations .....

In a different thread, you said
>>(starting with a PR 0) 40 iterations should be good enough. However, I would start with different initial values - taking PR=1 should speed up your calculations.

On pages that I control links and are identical, previously calculated pages have a PR of 5 but new pages have a PR of 4. From above posts, new pages seem to have a lower value for others also.

What if Google decided to do only a few iterations (maybe 10 or so) but started the value at the previous PR value. In most cases of old pages this should get about the same result as starting at 0 or 1 with many more iteratives but newly calculated pages (starting at 0) wouldn't reach their 'full/true' value at first.

Just a thought but makes sense to me that Google might do this and results/facts seem to support something of this nature.

I see a couple advantages,
1) save alot of time (10 iterations not 40, 50 ,100)
2) be more suited for development of a continuous PR calculation vs. an infrequently massive iterations on the whole web.
3) slow the impact of a massive link campaign. (i.e. if a page is new, why did get it suddenly get 1,000 links and stop the came out of nowhere to #1 jumps?spam?)
4) slow the drop to no where of a page if links were lost because a server was down, etc.
5) still reward the consistant but developing sites

and I could go on.