Forum Moderators: open
www.cs.rutgers.edu/~davison/
I am researching the application of machine learning techniques to the general task of action prediction and in particular to web caching. I've also been involved in research in analyzing the structure of the web for the purposes of ranking and clustering web pages and identifying web communities.
I have recently been part of a group of researchers at Rutgers studying methods for analyzing web structure analysis. This phrase is chosen as the title of this page only because I cannot think of a better name -- other possibilities include link analysis, but that has other connotations, topic distillation and Kleinberg's graph-based analysis of hypermedia.Anyway, we have identified three groups doing similar research:
-Kleinberg's original work including the CLEVER project at IBM
-Digital Research's Web Archeology group
-Stanford's Google search engine project
We have been working to understand and compare these methods, and to consider their performance as means of ranking the importance of web pages. Once this survey is complete, we also plan to investigate related questions and likely propose our own variant on these methods.
Too many links to list here but this guy has published a lot of papers. This smells like Teoma to me.
The constant attempt at comparisions with Google is a tactical promotion error. Everywhere you see them, you see the "Google" word in the same paragraph. Not only in interviews, but on thier site as well. That's short term gain, but a big long term mistake.
They need to stay as far away from the "google" word as possible. They've already branded them selves as a "wannabe" (even some stories are using the word). That translates long term into "also ran". They need to run from that as fast as possible.
Remember when Britney Spears first appeared? All the press was "she's the next Madona". Notice how quick they got off that? Same reason, and look where she is today.
Remember when Billy Ray Cyrus first appeared? All the press wasy "he's the next elvis".
Notice how quick they DIDN'T get off of that? Look where he is today.
Yes, they need to tap some grad students from the marketing department. Or come here and talk to us at least, since we've already raked their logo and domain name over the coals. [webmasterworld.com]
if I was dealing with Teoma they would never mention Google except to explain why it's no good...all other search engines would be treated as a generic and clueless irrelevant mass...they would ditch the name and find something sharper...and stop referring to themselves as "a search engine" and start calling themselves "the World's first XXXXX"...where XXXXX is something that implies search engine but isn't :)
they have the product...but it is no good getting the techies and SEOs excited...they can safely irritate us...they need to get the average user excited...and above all they need to seem new and different even to people who find it all new and different
I totally agree.
It would be like Pepsi saying we are developing a new drink that will taste like Coca-cola but with a tad more sugar. Would they ever do that? No, they would say "We are creating a new cola that has a breakthrough flavor."
What will happen when Google get's bitten in the *** by their current technologies? I'm starting to see the same sites appear in the same near positions when performing searches. Basing a site's relevancy on hubs and links can kill results after a while. You end up with x amount of sites that are declared total authorities and everything else get's thrown into the back.
If you declare that your product is similar to someone else's and that product fails, then so will yours.
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
