« Questions for Reiner Kraft, Technical Yahoo! | Main | Firefox Got Yahoo! »

February 07, 2005

Searching for True Possibilities: A Question From the Edge

What do you believe is true even though you can't prove it?

At The World Question Center, a virtual watering hole for intellectual discovery hosted by the Edge Foundation, a collection of scientists and cognoscenti have gathered to respond to this year's big question, "What do you believe is true even though you can't prove it?"

Edge is the brainchild of John Brockman, "cultural impresario," thought catalyst, and flamboyant literary agent. Brockman is a man who's made a career out of thinking big. He represents rock-star physicists, mathematicians, biologists, cognitive scientists, and authors who straddle many intellectual domains. Brockman believes that asking big questions in a roomful of big minds can yield rich and stimulating discourse, and feed the pursuit of intelligent hunches that benefit all of us.

In his introduction to the 2005 annual question, Brockman refers to the age of "searchculture" and ponders whether, as search technology gets better and better at answering our queries, we can continue to frame the right bright questions. The annual Edge science question smackdown is his contribution to this human quest.

Computer scientist Marti Hearst, one of 120 contributors to this year's Edge exercise, looks at how we use language to pose questions and find answers when we search on the Internet. She believes, but can't prove, that "the Search Problem is solvable"; that elegant, innovative advances in technology will allow people to find the answer to any question that's already been documented and answered in text. For Hearst, understanding queries is key to making Internet search tools more effective.

The Web has made human knowledge publicly accessible via vast electronic repositories of data. Search engines have an endless appetite for this bounty of information (and misinformation) as they ceaselessly crawl and consume the expanding online universe. Computational linguistics, natural language processing, and related technologies uncover rules that help search engines communicate better with us humans.

Hearst's work focuses on algorithms and interfaces that help users locate information without drowning in data. Researchers can discover new, unanticipated answers to unsolved problems through a process known as text mining. Users can find their way through complex information spaces like archives or image galleries, if the interface is designed for a flexible and
flowing experience.

As computer scientists discover new ways to "teach" the search engine to respond "intelligently" to patterns in our search behavior, search technology helps us hone in on that elusive needle in the haystack. Occasionally, it even spins us wonderful golden threads we couldn't have imagined in the days before the Web.

Personally, I'm a big believer in serendipitous discovery (in life and in search), and I believe, but can't prove, that serendipity is closely related to the mind's ability to weave truth out of hunches and accidental discoveries.

Meaning out of chaos. Isn't that what science, and for that matter Yahoo! Search, is all about?

Let us know what you believe is true about Search, even if you can't prove it. We welcome your comments and ideas.

(Note: Marti Hearst is currently serving as a consultant and science advisor to Yahoo! Search.)

Havi Hoffman
Yahoo! Editorial

Comments

Q: What do you believe is true even though you can't prove it?
A: Postulates.

That out there is a company that hires people to drive on major roads during rush hours, particularly focusing on the roads I tend to pick.

Someday Search on Internet will consider all forms of information -- images, audio, video, and others -- at the same level as text. And Internet will be liberated by the Gutenberg Legacy (or Gutenberg barrier) to our thinking.

I do not seek. I find.
(Nice Picasso quote)

A vastly improved ubiquitos computing search exists in Yahoo! R&D labs (Dr Price et al)..........but I cannot prove it :)

Melding Search Technology or any technology with the ambiguities of humanity is a daunting task to say the least.

We have gone from using mathematics to represent verbalizations to attempting verbalization in context with mathematical equation.

Search is only as useful as the results it yields. In my opinion, the way to go is to simply seek to answer the six basic interogatives: who, when, where, why, what, and how.

Any Search engine that consistently provides relevant results to these inquiries will in the end win out. That is where every person who uses language to communicate starts when it comes to finding answers. With a question.

The bottom line is still the same...A search engine will never be able to answer a question unless (1) A human has already answered it (2) they have also written a very well structured website or blog that just happens to have the "question you just asked" strategically placed as keyword phrases throughout the site AND (3) the human who knows the answer and built the website or blog is willing to pay .49 per click to show you the answer to the question you just asked. Makes sense to me.


I have tried this for 2 years now by putting together a phrase that never gets any action as far as search engine popularity like "let's play some world tour in Alabama" then use this very same title on a page that is already indexed for "world tour" in all the sites including google,msn and yahoo just to see if my page comes up after its been recrawled. Google...not even in the top 100 after 60 days. Yahoo has been the best with it usually in the top 20 as quick as 30 days, with msn a close second coming in the top 40 sites. This is obviously just my own tiny experiment with no-one knowing what i'm doing except me but..... the results have always been the same. Some of this comment has been omitted due to questionable filters !

The answer to the question is......I believe it's true that yahoo is my friend and google isn't but I can't prove it :-))