Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Pagerank queries - the <rk> parameter

What do such figures as Rank_1:1:6 Rank_1:1:5 mean?

         

selomelo

10:10 pm on Feb 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



We already know that toolbar PR is in fact an historical figure. When you query google for current PR, you get some mysterious figures such as:

Rank_1:1:6 Rank_1:1:5 Rank_1:1:4 Rank_1:1:4 Rank_1:1:5 Rank_1:1:6 Rank_1:1:5 Rank_1:1:0 Rank_1:1:1 Rank_1:1:5 Rank_1:1:2 Rank_1:1:3 Rank_1:1:0 Rank_1:1:0 Rank_1:1:3

These figures are for a site that has a current toolbar of PR4.

I searched the web for an explanation, but failed to get a good one.

Is there any idea as to what all these magical numbers mean?

Oliver Henniges

9:22 pm on Feb 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Hanu, either I'm silly or your code doesn't work in IE. It definitely generates wrong checksums and URLs. I replaced the pipe-characters as requested but I always receive forbidden. What exactly do the functions calculate (do you have any url at hand explaining them)?

Has anyone explained these tags yet:

- <HAS>
<L TAG="link:" />
<C SZ="9k" CID="SkCXAwDSf9QJ" TAG="cache:" ENC="" />
<RT TAG="related:" />
</HAS>

SZ seems to mean size. What about that "related-"issue? I noticed that quite recently the results of related:www.mydomain.com, which normally revealed basically my dmoz-neighbours, have completely changed.

I also noticed
<CRAWLDATE>16. Febr. 2006</CRAWLDATE>
is that a general info or does it have to do with the google-sitemaps framework?

Oliver Henniges

9:59 pm on Feb 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Diving deep down into the result-pages with start=>700 I found e.g. some very old google-groups-postings of mine archived. The RK-tag assigned a value of 4 to some of them, whereas the toolbar shows 0.

So unless we assume specific filters concerning these groups-archives I'd say that it is sufficiently disproved this value would show future TBPR. Quite unlikely such old pages would get a new value assigned the next time.

selomelo

11:25 pm on Feb 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



As far as I see, right now, a PR update has already started in two datacenters:
216.239.53.99
216.239.53.104
I think this is a good opportunity to compare xml results of these two DCs with other DCs to check if the <RK> values are related to future PR

watercrazed

12:27 am on Feb 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I saw a change on some internal pages on the other two and this one as well from 0 to 3 which is what is expected
216.239.57.99
The tool predicted a 4

My home page did not change but the tool showed a 2 level increase for it from 4 to 6

Hanu

2:21 am on Feb 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Olliver,

the checksum code is only tested in FF. Its the same code included in G's toolbar for FF and it's used to compute the ch parameter which is a checksum/hash of q parameter itself. Google uses the hash to make it more diffcult to programatically query the PageRank using scripts or so. It was cracked several times in the past and can hardly be considered a secret anymore considering that the source to the hash algo is publicly available in Google's toolbar for Firefox.

Oliver Henniges

6:17 am on Feb 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Thx, maybe I should install FF some day.

I also have to correct my above comment concerning TBPR. The RK-value shows the general PR of any of googles newsgroups, whereas any particular posting comprises a databasequery over the groups which is not indexed as an idempotent URL. So the value also seems to be fine in these entries.

Dayo_UK

9:36 am on Feb 19, 2006 (gmt 0)



selomelo

The new PR matches by <RK> values as the <RK> values were a week or so ago - the <RK> values have moved on since then for me - so it does indicate to me that those <rk> values are pretty on the mark - although the export was a couple of weeks ago.

selomelo

9:58 am on Feb 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Dayo_UK:
...so it does indicate to me that those <rk> values are pretty on the mark

Despite the contrary opinions, I am almost confident that <rk> values largely reflect current PR (or future TB PR).

For example, <RK> for a newly built site (1 mo old) was 4, and the update shows a PR4.

My blog page had a PR3, <RK> = 5, and now the update shows a PR5.

However, there is one thing weird: my homepage had a P4, <RK> shows 6, bud update shows PR5. But this might be another story, since it had a google directory PR5 while toolbar PR was 4.

Dayo_UK

10:03 am on Feb 19, 2006 (gmt 0)



selomelo

It looks like the data for the newly displayed PR is a couple of weeks old though - so your homepage may already have moved on since then.

I dont know exactly what my <RK> values were at Jan 29th to Feb 4th - which appears to have been when the new toolbar PR is being displayed from.

This PR update is only on the non-BD dcs too - I would therefore assume that after BD roll out there may be another PR update.

Oliver Henniges

10:06 am on Feb 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



> since it had a google directory PR5 while toolbar PR was 4.

is it really necessary to point out again that the directory-bar covers a scale from 1-7 instead of 1-10?

[edited by: Oliver_Henniges at 10:18 am (utc) on Feb. 19, 2006]

This 182 message thread spans 19 pages: 182