Comments on: A Topology of Search Concepts http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/ Mon, 21 May 2012 05:21:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Writing a Book on Search User Experience - Things On Top http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-4209 Writing a Book on Search User Experience - Things On Top Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:14:39 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-4209 [...] to write an e-book about search user experience, based on some of my latest blog posts (and all the great discussions they have sparked). I started writing this summer, and that is partly why blogging has [...] [...] to write an e-book about search user experience, based on some of my latest blog posts (and all the great discussions they have sparked). I started writing this summer, and that is partly why blogging has [...]

]]> By: Vegard Sandvold http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3023 Vegard Sandvold Tue, 05 May 2009 21:35:20 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3023 FYI - just posted an update: "Mediating Information - What Does That Mean?" http://www.thingsontop.com/mediating-information-737.html FYI – just posted an update: “Mediating Information – What Does That Mean?”

http://www.thingsontop.com/mediating-information-737.html

]]> By: CJ http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3022 CJ Tue, 05 May 2009 13:35:16 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3022 This is wonderful stuff, I love the diagram too! For a blog post this is great. As far as serious research goes, yes it needs to be more thorough :) This is wonderful stuff, I love the diagram too! For a blog post this is great. As far as serious research goes, yes it needs to be more thorough :)

]]> By: Vegard Sandvold http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3020 Vegard Sandvold Mon, 04 May 2009 21:40:54 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3020 Thanks for the feedback so far, guys! It's really helpful. I'll be the first to admit that my visualization is simplified and with a few short-comings, but leaving things out is part of the art of concept modeling. To flip it around, let me try to explain the story of each quadrant, and hopefully that will give you some ideas for how the axes could be different. <strong>Diligent Search</strong> can make user responsible both for making latent structures of the data more apparent, and for iteratively expressing their information needs. That would include both faceted search and systems like Freebase, where users are the main driving force. <strong>Ingenious Search</strong> would try to achieve greater precision with algorithms for data mining, clustering and NLP. That would include systems like Wolfram Alpha, Powerset and Grokker. <strong>Superficial Search</strong> does not aim to reach deep into the information space, making direct manipulative control less important. Instead group behavior is used to surface popular and recent content. Twitter and Amazon are great examples. <strong>Simple Search</strong> is all you may need to navigational queries, and other examples of directed search. The user may know exactly what he's looking for, he knows the document exists, and he knows how to formulate his query to find it. Like Google back in 1998. Thanks for the feedback so far, guys! It’s really helpful. I’ll be the first to admit that my visualization is simplified and with a few short-comings, but leaving things out is part of the art of concept modeling.

To flip it around, let me try to explain the story of each quadrant, and hopefully that will give you some ideas for how the axes could be different.

Diligent Search can make user responsible both for making latent structures of the data more apparent, and for iteratively expressing their information needs. That would include both faceted search and systems like Freebase, where users are the main driving force.

Ingenious Search would try to achieve greater precision with algorithms for data mining, clustering and NLP. That would include systems like Wolfram Alpha, Powerset and Grokker.

Superficial Search does not aim to reach deep into the information space, making direct manipulative control less important. Instead group behavior is used to surface popular and recent content. Twitter and Amazon are great examples.

Simple Search is all you may need to navigational queries, and other examples of directed search. The user may know exactly what he’s looking for, he knows the document exists, and he knows how to formulate his query to find it. Like Google back in 1998.

]]> By: Vegard Sandvold http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3019 Vegard Sandvold Mon, 04 May 2009 21:20:38 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3019 @jeremy I think systems with a good symbiosis between algorithms and users could be centered on the horizontal axis. But where would that place systems based on collaborative filtering? Lots of user feedback, but little direct control. Hm... @jeremy
I think systems with a good symbiosis between algorithms and users could be centered on the horizontal axis. But where would that place systems based on collaborative filtering? Lots of user feedback, but little direct control. Hm…

]]> By: Vegard Sandvold http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3018 Vegard Sandvold Mon, 04 May 2009 20:48:48 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3018 @jeremy My initial idea was to have the horizontal axis represent to what extent human or machine intelligence is primarily responsible for resolving the users information need. In my head that would place black-boxed best-first systems to the extreme left (where the user does little but supplying the initial query), while HCIR would be closer to the middle/right. Here the algorithm still does something (like retrieving a set of relevant candidates), but it's largely up to the user to increase the precision. I think it's difficult to find examples of purely user-powered systems. Twitter Search is my best guess. Would that be similar to traditional Boolean search, like mentioned by Daniel? @Mark Johnson Daniel is right. Users need things that just work, but we who are making these things need to understand why they work (or not). I hope you find it useful. Cheers! @jeremy
My initial idea was to have the horizontal axis represent to what extent human or machine intelligence is primarily responsible for resolving the users information need. In my head that would place black-boxed best-first systems to the extreme left (where the user does little but supplying the initial query), while HCIR would be closer to the middle/right. Here the algorithm still does something (like retrieving a set of relevant candidates), but it’s largely up to the user to increase the precision.

I think it’s difficult to find examples of purely user-powered systems. Twitter Search is my best guess. Would that be similar to traditional Boolean search, like mentioned by Daniel?

@Mark Johnson
Daniel is right. Users need things that just work, but we who are making these things need to understand why they work (or not). I hope you find it useful. Cheers!

]]> By: Daniel Tunkelang http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3017 Daniel Tunkelang Mon, 04 May 2009 19:49:56 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3017 Jeremy, I think Vegard should answer that himself, but that it's a matter of relative contribution. I'd put traditional Boolean search at the extreme where the user does everything and the system does nothing, black-box best-first search at the other extreme (where the system does almost everything), and HCIR approaches in the middle. Mark, your point is well taken, but I think you're mixing up audiences. Users may be content to be oblivious of technology, but application developers--and perhaps business more generally--can't afford to be. Keeping users happy requires understanding what solutions will best meet their needs. And, to Vegard's credit, the approaches he describes are not faddish features, but established approaches to information seeking. Jeremy, I think Vegard should answer that himself, but that it’s a matter of relative contribution. I’d put traditional Boolean search at the extreme where the user does everything and the system does nothing, black-box best-first search at the other extreme (where the system does almost everything), and HCIR approaches in the middle.

Mark, your point is well taken, but I think you’re mixing up audiences. Users may be content to be oblivious of technology, but application developers–and perhaps business more generally–can’t afford to be. Keeping users happy requires understanding what solutions will best meet their needs. And, to Vegard’s credit, the approaches he describes are not faddish features, but established approaches to information seeking.

]]> By: Mark Johnson http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3016 Mark Johnson Mon, 04 May 2009 19:33:01 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3016 I've seen a number of these graphs over the years to try to separate vertical vs. web search, deep vs. shallow content, etc. All of them fail in that they tend to show user features that are currently in vogue in the quadrants. Users want to find information: they don't care about the tools (except in that they're easy) or the source (expect that it's available, authoratative and as close to free as possible). To quote ArnoldIT: Users don't want to search, they want to find. I’ve seen a number of these graphs over the years to try to separate vertical vs. web search, deep vs. shallow content, etc. All of them fail in that they tend to show user features that are currently in vogue in the quadrants. Users want to find information: they don’t care about the tools (except in that they’re easy) or the source (expect that it’s available, authoratative and as close to free as possible). To quote ArnoldIT: Users don’t want to search, they want to find.

]]> By: Vegard Sandvold http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3015 Vegard Sandvold Mon, 04 May 2009 19:15:31 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3015 Hi Daniel, Thanks for the comment and valuable feedback. I'm glad you accept the champion title :-) I'm a big fan of organizing ideas, and I hope to make this start of a framework more rigid. The axes definitely need more work. Quantifying and formalizing would be good, and any pointers to relevant literature would be very helpful. Cheers! Hi Daniel,
Thanks for the comment and valuable feedback. I’m glad you accept the champion title :-)

I’m a big fan of organizing ideas, and I hope to make this start of a framework more rigid. The axes definitely need more work. Quantifying and formalizing would be good, and any pointers to relevant literature would be very helpful.

Cheers!

]]> By: jeremy http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/04/a-topology-of-search-concepts/comment-page-1/#comment-3014 jeremy Mon, 04 May 2009 19:11:32 +0000 http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2037#comment-3014 What's the difference, really, between user-powered and algorithm-powered? Ideally, I want information retrieval systems that are strongly algorithm-powered in that they reveal concepts and linkages and information that I would and could not have discovered on my own, but that give me, the user, direct manipulative control over which of those pieces are important to me. There should really be a symbiosis between algorithm and user. Or is that what he already means by user-powered? What’s the difference, really, between user-powered and algorithm-powered? Ideally, I want information retrieval systems that are strongly algorithm-powered in that they reveal concepts and linkages and information that I would and could not have discovered on my own, but that give me, the user, direct manipulative control over which of those pieces are important to me. There should really be a symbiosis between algorithm and user. Or is that what he already means by user-powered?

]]>