A New Concept or Buzzy Jargon?
August 16, 2010
Is the internet changing again? Will the term “Web 2.0” be about as useful as vacuum tubes in a television soon? The job is all but done, one data manipulating company claims. Data governance experts, Collibra (http://www.collibra.com/), who help clients better transform data into usable information, brought up some interesting and head-scratching points about the future of data management in a recent Collibra Inside blog post, “Social Semantics, Hybrid Ontologies and the Tri-Sortal Internet.”(http://inside.collibra.com/?p=767) Providing slides from a recent conference about how we can “tackle the mass of (meta)data about communities (enterprises, business webs), people, and systems and the links in between,” the article went on to claim, “visual analysis of the linked data cloud reveals the same non-linear graph structure as found in social networks. Hence there is indeed a tri-sortal dynamics.” This is some heady stuff, but intriguing. The term “tri-sortal” is definitely one we’ll keep on file for the future. We may not use it, however.
Pat Roland, August 16, 2010
Six Semantic Vendors Profiled
August 9, 2010
I saw in my newsreader this story: “Introducing Six Semantic Technology Vendors: Strengthening Insurance Business Initiatives with Semantic Technologies.” The write up is a table of contents or a flier for a report prepared by one of the azurini with a focus on what seems to be “life and non life insurance companies.”
For me the most interesting snippet in the advertisement was this sequence, which I have formatted to make more readable.
Attivio offers a common access platform combining unstructured and structured content [Note: one of Attivio’s founders has left the building. No details.]
Cambridge Semantics wants to help companies quickly obtain practical results [Note: more of a business intelligence type solution.]
Lexalytics has a ‘laser-focus’ on sentiment analysis. [Note: lots of search and content processing in a Microsoft centric wrapper.]
Linguamatics finds the nuggets hidden in plain sight. [Note: the real deal with a core competency in pharmaceuticals which I suppose is similar to life and non life insurance companies.]
MetaCarta identifies location references in unstructured documents in real-time. [Note: a geo tagging centric system now chased by outfits like MarkLogic, Microsoft, and lots of others]
SchemaLogic enables information to be found and shared more effectively using semantic technologies. [Note: I thought this outfit managed metatags across an enterprise. At one time, the company was focused on Microsoft technology. Today? I don’t know because when one of the founders cut out, my interest tapered off.]
The list and its accompanying prose are interesting to me for three reasons:
First, the descriptions of these firms as semantic does not map to my impression of the six firms’ technologies. I am okay with the inclusion of Cambridge Semantics and Linguamatics but I am not in sync with the azurini who plopped the other four outfits in the list. I think I can dredge up an argument to include these four firms on a content processing list, but gung-ho semantic technology. Nope.
Second, the link pointed me to a reseller of market research. The hitch in the git along for me was that the landing page did not point to the report. When I ran a query for “semantic technology vendors” I saw this message: “Sorry, no reports matching your search were found. For personal search assistance, please send us a request at contact@aarkstore.com.”
Third, the source of the report did not jump off the page at me. In short, what the heck is this document? How much does it cost? How can anyone buy it if the vendor’s search system doesn’t work and the write up on the Moso-technology.com Web site is fragmented.
I can’t recommend buying or not buying the report. Too bad.
Stephen E Arnold, August 9, 2010
Will People Type Questions, Not Keywords?
August 5, 2010
In ‘Consumer Beware, Innovation in Search Benefits Google’ econsultancy.com reports that although Microsoft’s new search engine Bing has been making waves in the search market and slowly nibbling at the edges of Google’s search dominance, smaller engines still have an uphill battle when it comes to toppling Google in search. Ask.com’s Barry Diller pointed out that innovation in search often works toward Google’s advantage, regardless of whether Google does the innovating. Ask.com made headlines recently with some user interface changes that reverted the site back to its earlier question and answer format, and the site grew 18 percent, beating expectations. Will this new format continue to grow the company’s audience? Will people take the time to type in their questions or will they revert to Google’s catch-phrase entry method? We don’t want to type questions, and we think we not be lone geese.
Brett Quinn, August 5, 2010
The New Ask Is the Same Old Ask
July 30, 2010
I have written so much about Ask.com, formerly AskJeeves.com, that I am not going to go over the long and quite interesting history. I want to talk about DirectHit, the enterprise play, the fling with the Rutgers’ wizards, and the death of the smirking butler.
Won’t do it. No.
I want to direct your attention to “Can Ask.com’s New Search Strategy Work?” The article summarizes the most recent type-a-question, get-an-answer approach for the Web search service. The article points out that Ask.com is in the Q&A based query business, and that’s close enough for horseshoes in a race with a leader way out front, number two loaded down with billions of dollars and a crazed gleam in its eye, a confused third place runner, and then dear old Ask.com.
The write up does a good job of explaining how the system answers questions. There is a reference to “proprietary matching technology”, a secret sauce. Don’t forget the human element. And there’s a comment that is okay with me for a company that has not done much since one of the Ziff fellows with whom I worked labored in the AskJeeves vineyard early in the company’s history. Here’s the passage I noted:
Ask.com’s new strategy could deliver an indirect and slightly ironic benefit: By creating an ever-growing number of user-generated answer pages, Ask will likely gain decent placement in Google searches for commonly discussed topics. And that’ll mean people searching Google for information will end up clicking on Ask’s answers. So even if it doesn’t attract hoards of new long-term users, Ask may find enough added incidental traffic to help it grow as a small but consistently present niche player.
From my point of view, search has lost its focus. The Google style stuff is too expensive for too many to sign on to index the Web. There are too many things to code around. The ad world is chugging along, but there has not been change in Google’s revenue because no one has found a way to trip Googzilla.
The surge in mobile devices and smaller form factors makes the result list look dorky. The notion of answering a tough question is tough because lots of Web users want to type 2.3 words, hit the enter key, and be done with search. Others are happy taking whatever the mobile device spits out. Pizza? Hey, there’s one. Looks good to me. Other vendors are using saved queries and just pumping stuff to people who match a profile a person created or an algorithm ginned up.
The addled goose has some ideas for an outfit like Ask.com, but I live in Harrod’s Creek, and the Barry Diller mavens live far away from the pond filled with mine run off.
Oh, I did a query for Beyond Search, and it came up number one. Exciting.
But when I read “Competitors beware: Innovation in search benefits Google,” I learned that Barry Diller learned that advertising via Nascar sponsorships, tossing in new tricks, and dreaming of a big winner were wrong headed. Ah, what one can learn by doing.
Stephen E Arnold, July 30, 2010
Yahoo! and Microsoft, Wedded Bliss?
July 27, 2010
Yahoo! and Microsoft have exchanged rings, gone to the chapel and returned from their honeymoon (http://www.internetnews.com/search/article.php/3894486). Now the world waits to see what kind of baby they’ll make. The two search also-rans are in the process of combining Microsoft’s Bing (www.bing.com) search technology with Yahoo!’s established presence in an attempt to compete with Google. “As we continue to make progress implementing various aspects of the Yahoo and Microsoft Search Alliance,” a spokesman said. “Our two companies continue to work together towards the goal of providing a quality transition experience for advertisers.”
While we’re all curious if this merger will produce a Rosemary’s Baby, securing its advertising first strikes us as a wise approach. It’ll take big bucks to stop Google’s dominance and this might be the key.
In fact, MarketWatch’s “What’s wrong with Yahoo?” makes the point that Yahoo has a knack for turning a blue ribbon into an also-participated certificate. The article said:
Everything it does is second rate, or when they buy a company they put it on a track to become second rate. When they develop or buy something that is not only first rate or fundamentally a world-beater, they have no clue as to how to market it.
MarketWatch focuses on the firm’s management, which is skilled in cursing may lack the touch required to make the marriage work. The addled goose has yet to recover from the verbal baloney tossed at him after the publication of his analysis of Google’s attempt to corner the semantic Web. Not only did Google fizzle, so did Yahoo. What’s that tell you about the difficulties of the semantic stuff and the overweening confidence programmers have in their own team’s abilities? The goose learned a lot.
Stephen E Arnold, July 27, 2010
World Cup Tries to Score with Semantics
July 21, 2010
No referees to blame for the World Cup’s use of semantic technology. With a spiffed up Web site, the BBC can point to its non-pay wall coverage of the World Cup and especially of the semantic technologies that were used to add value and structure to the 700 pages it presented on a Web site to the world. “BBC World Cup Website Showcases Semantic Technologies” called this innovation to the addled goose’s attention. Here’s a diagram of the Beeb’s system:
There were several noteworthy changes including a far deeper and richer use of the text and other content that was available and horizontal navigation and higher quality video. The semantic technologies that were used work within the framework of automated metadata-driven web pages that automatically render links to stories of interest.
Here’s a diagram from AerospaceWeb about the physics of the Jabulani ball. Also, easy to understand?
Source: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/drag/drag-disk.jpg
The semantic technologies that were so useful here did not write the content that football fans saw on the 700 pages of the site. The semantics technologies involved worked with the metadata about the site. Overall, BBC tried to offer a combination of goals, saves and semantic technologies that fans enjoyed thoroughly.
Maybe your team needs to adopt the semantic training regimen? Seems rigorous to me and a step some of the pay wall sites may want to consider if the revenues from their for-fee customers funds this type of innovation, of course. Semantics, like search and analyzing the flight of the World Cup ball, is pretty simple too!
Stephen E Arnold, July 19, 2010
Freebie
Silverchair Tagmaster 4
July 19, 2010
There’s a new tagging solution from the Semedica Division of Silverchair that includes automated tagging for a variety of content including medical and scientific text. According to a press release from the company, the Tagmaster has already been used for the semantic enrichment of hundreds of thousands of pages of STM content.
The Tagmaster system works by using an aggressive taxonomy with text analytics to provide an automated tagging process that has a useful domain aware dimension. The advantage here is the fact that the system can be easily integrated into live application and other production workflows.
Tagmaster 4.0 also features a Configuration Dashboard that allows users without technical expertise the ability to adjust the autotagging settings. Silverchair’s Semedica Releases Tagmaster 4.0 Integrated Semantic Tagging Solution is another way the firm enables providers in science technology and medicine to connect through dynamic knowledge applications.
Rob Starr, July 19, 2010
Freebie
Google Metaweb Deal Points to Possible Engineering Issue
July 19, 2010
Years ago, I wrote a BearStearns’ white paper “Google’s Semantic Web: the Radical Change Coming to Search and the Profound Implications to Yahoo & Microsoft,” May 16, 2007, about the work of Epinions’ founder, Dr. Ramanathan Guha. Dr. Guha bounced from big outfit to big outfit, landing at Google after a stint at IBM Almaden. My BearStearns’ report focused on an interesting series of patent applications filed in February 2007. The five patent applications were published on the same day. These are now popping out of the ever efficient USPTO as granted patents.
A close reading of the Guha February 2007 patent applications and other Google technical papers make clear that Google had a keen interest in semantic methods. The company’s acquisition of Transformics at about the same time as Dr. Guha’s jump to the Google was another out-of-spectrum signal for most Google watchers.
With Dr. Guha’s Programmable Search Engine inventions and Dr. Alon Halevy’s dataspace methods, Google seemed poised to take over the floundering semantic Web movement. I recall seeing Google classification methods applied in a recipe demo, a headache demo, and a real estate demo. Some of these demos made use of entities; for example, “skin cancer” and “chicken soup”.
Has Google become a one trick pony? The buy-technology trick? Can the Google pony learn the diversify and grow new revenue tricks before it’s time for the glue factory?
In 2006, signals I saw flashed green, and it sure looked as if Google could speed down the Information Highway 101 in its semantic supercar.
Is Metaweb a Turning Point for Google Technology?
What happened?
We know from the cartwheels Web wizards are turning, Google purchased computer Zen master Danny Hillis’ Metaweb business. Metaweb, known mostly to the information retrieval and semantic Web crowd, produced a giant controlled term list of people, places, and things. The Freebase knowledgebase is a next generation open source term list. You can get some useful technical details from the 2007 “On Danny Hillis, eLearning, Freebase, Metaweb, Semantic Web and Web 3.0” and from the Wikipedia Metaweb entry here.
What has been missing in the extensive commentary available to me in my Overflight service is some thinking about what went right or wrong with Google’s investments and research in closely adjacent technologies. Please, keep in mind that the addled goose is offering his observations based on his research for this three Google monographs, The Google Legacy, Google Version 2.0, and Google: the Digital Gutenberg. If you want to honk back, use the comments section of this Web log.
First, Google should be in a position to tap its existing metadata and classification systems such as the Guha context server and the Halevy dataspace method for entities. Failing these methods, Google has its user input methods like Knol and its hugely informative search query usage logs to generate a list of entities. Heck, there is even the disambiguation system to make sense of misspellings of people like Britney Spears. I heard a Googler give a talk in which the factoid about hundreds of variants of Ms. Spears’s name were “known” to the Google system and properly substituted automagically when the user goofed. The fact that Google bought Metaweb makes clear that something is still missing.
Ontoprise Bids to Stay on Top of Semantic Web Technologies
July 15, 2010
Ontoprise GmbH from Germany is looking to increase their already impressive line of Semantic Web infrastructure products with OntoBroker 6.0 and OntoStudio 3.0.
The company is constantly looking to improve its web services and to that end that have developed ways to interface existing technologies into their OntoBroker web-services. Along with an overall promise to improve performance there are a few specific areas that this company has highlighted including:
- A collaboration server that has extended rights management
- Ontology optimizing tools that are integrated
- Improved handling of very large ontologies
When it comes to the most reliable and technologically advanced semantic web technologies and products, Ontoprise has been an industry leader in delivering key elements for the upcoming advancements in semantic Web.
Rob Starr, July 16, 2010
Freebie
Wikipedia Looks Ahead To Web 3.0
July 15, 2010
As far as Wikipedia’s Foundation is concerned, one of the cornerstones for moving the global resource to the next level and Web 3.0 will be making that data on the site’s 15 million articles decipherable to computers as well as the humans pushing their buttons.
Last month’s 2010 Semantic Technology conference in San Francisco saw developers showcasing how the needed semantic structure might be added to Wikipedia. It’s a big idea for a big database. Still there is a question as to the real value of the move.
The people attending the conference from Wikipedia were also actively recruiting help to make the base of the website more accessible to both computers and software.
One of the questions is how to determine the benefits when the service is implemented.
Rob Starr, July 15, 2010
Freebie
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
