NLP: Do Not Look at Results. Look at Pictures

April 6, 2013

One of my two or three readers sent me a link to a LinkedIn post in the Information Access and Search Professionals section of the job hunting and consultant networking service. LinkedIn owns Slideshare (a hosting service for those who are comfortable communicating with presentations) and Pulse (an information aggregation service which plays the role of a selective dissemination of information service via a jazzy interface).

The posting which the reader wanted me to read was “How Natural Language Processing Will Change E Commerce Search Forever.” Now that is a bold statement. Most of the search systems we have tested feature facets, prediction, personalization, hit boosting for specials and deals, and near real time inventory updating.

The company posting the information put a version of the LinkedIn information on the Web at Inbenta.

The point of the information is to suggest that Inbenta can deliver more functionality which is backed by what is called “search to buy conversions.” In today’s economy, that’s catnip to many ecommerce site owners who—I presume—use Endeca, Exalead, SLI, and EasyAsk, among others.

I  am okay with a vendor  like Inbenta or any of the analytics hustlers asserting that one type of cheese is better than another. In France alone, there are more than 200 varieties and each has a “best”. When it comes to search, there is no easy way to do a tasting unless I can get my hands on the fungible Chevrotin.

Search, like cheese, has to be experienced, not talked about. A happy nibble to Alpes gourmet at http://www.alpesgourmet.com/fromage-savoie-vercors/1008.php

In the case of this Inbenta demonstration, I am enjoined to look at two sets of results from a the Grainger.com site. The problem is I cannot read the screenshots. I am not able to determine if the present Grainer.com site is the one used for the “before” and “after” examples.

Next I am asked to look at queries from PCMall.com. Again, I could not read the screenshots. The write up says:

Again, the actual details of the search results are not important; just pay attention that both are very different. But in both cases, wasn’t what we searched basically the same thing? Why are the results so different?

The same approach was used to demonstrate that Amazon’s ecommerce search is doing some interesting things. Amazon is working on search at this time, and I think the company realizes that its system for ecommerce and for the hosted service leaves something out of the cookie recipe.

My view is that if a vendor wants to call attention to differences, perhaps these simple guidelines would eliminate the confusion and frustration I experience when I try to figure out what is going on, what is good and bad, and how the outputs differ:

First, provide a link to each of the systems so I can run the queries and look at the results myself. I did not buy into the Watson Jeopardy promotion because in television, magic takes place in some editing studios. Screenshots which I cannot read nor replicate open the door to similar suspicions.

Second, to communicate the “fix” I need more than an empty data table. A list of options does not help me. We continue to struggle with systems which describe a “to be” future yet cannot deliver a “here and now” result. I have a long and winding call with an analytics vendor in Nashville, Tennessee which follows a similar, abstract path in explaining what the company’s technology does. If one cannot show functionality, I don’t have time to listen to science fiction.

Third, the listing of high profile sites is useful for search engine optimization, but not for making crystal clear the whys and wherefores of a content processing system. Specific information is needed, please.

To wrap up, let me quote from the Inbenta essay:

By applying these techniques on e-commerce website search, we have accomplished the following results in the first few weeks.

  • Increase in conversion ratio: +1.73%
  • Increase average purchase value: +11%

Okay, interesting numbers. What is the factual foundation of them? What method was used to calculate the deltas? What was the historical base of the specific sites in the sample?

In a world in which vendors and their pet consultants jump forward with predictions, assertions, and announcements of breakthroughs—some simple facts can be quite helpful. I am okay with self promotion but when asking me to see comparisons, I have to be able to run the queries myself. Without that important step, I am skeptical just as I was with the sci-fi fancies of the folks who put marketing before substance.

Stephen E Arnold, April 6, 2013

Sponsored by Augmentext

Comments

Comments are closed.

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta