Term Vector Database?

it's driving me nuts, I wish i knew

[han solo]

Okay, maybe they decided at some point, relevancy doesn't matter. But why do they insist on such a high filtration rate of new material into the index, I've heard it put at 95%, and they give the results that they do?

How can it hurt to have spam, (i'm not advocating they allow it, just being extremist to show my frustration) when the results that they already are giving are horrible. I looked for car stereo, and the results were aweful!!!

Does anyone else feel this way? I know they've been around for a while, and supposedly have this advanced technology built on the term vector database idea, and the bowtie theory of the web, and this, that, and the other. I've read the papers. They make for fascinating reading, but I fail to see how they put such a system together, when car stereo clearly should be a candidate for the term vector pairs.

However, there isn't one. Or am I an idiot, and nobody that searches for car stereo really wants car stereo? If any body is reading this who works at av, I do have some ideas for how you could improve the relevancy. And I don't mean allowing me to decide it myself, according to who pays me what. ( although if you wanted to do that, it'd be okay.)

[rencke]

> supposedly have this advanced technology built on the term vector database idea,

That is not in place yet. Asked the AV representative (business development mgr Nordic area) at the IMC2000 conference in Stockholm and hadn't even heard about it. Clearly not envisaged for the forseable future. Still in the labs probably.

[han solo]

Thanks.

I am curious, though, because some searches default to both terms, car stereo, for example. (by the way, I'm not selling one, or trying to by one. Just though the term might be "competitive")

Shouldn't this term be one that defaults to both, instead of car, stereo? Like search engine optimization, for example. That search doesn't bring up documents for search, then engine, then optimization. So why don't they have cued into the system car stereo in similar fashion? Would make sense, wouldn't it?

I just wish that AV was more relevant, that's all. Because sometimes it seems to me that their insistance on keeping cloakers, etc. out of the db that it has hurt their listings. Anyone else feel the same? Though honestly, if they could get relevant keyword/phrase matches without cloakers, etc. I would be thrilled. Then they would trump everybody. But now, I think that they are missing the boat...

[Brett_Tabke]

A term vector database has been used at altavista for over a year. Mostly under the auspices of Teragram Corporation.

[rcjordan]

>just wish that AV was more relevant
I don't know about the ultra-competitive terms, but I have to vote for AV/Raging as currently having the best algo out there for determining relevance.

[seth_wilde]

Ok, I'm not exactly sure were your coming from here.

First the 95% that's been floating around wasn't a filtration rate (that I know of). It was an estimate to the percent of new submissions that were spam.

Second, the phrase "car stereo" does default to exact matching. And when I do look at the results, their all relevant! Of the top ten results 6 sell car stereos, 2 are about installing car stereos, 1 has reviews of car stereos, and 1 has links to sites about car stereos.

I guess I don't understand what the problems is.....

[han solo]

What the?????

They changed the results!!!!!!! Now I'm upset. Not to mention, I really look like an idiot. Perhaps it's because I'm on a different computer than this morning. Oh, well.

Thanks. I think I'll shut up now. :)

[seth_wilde]

They must of read this thread and took your advice :)

[rcjordan]

>They must of read this thread and took your advice

Dear AV, I have this site that hasn't been doing so well....

[bigjohnt]

I am almost afraid to post. I post on AV , I get slammed down 100 ranks. I post on Google, I'm out of the index...
<conspiracy theory bubbling up>