5 ms·
Have the Bing team expose their algorithms and criterion to the public so they can settle a spat with Google over 7/100 made up words appearing in a set of sear
by Aaronontheweb 16y ago
Have the Bing team expose their algorithms and criterion to the public so they can settle a spat with Google over 7/100 made up words appearing in a set of search results?
That sounds reasonable.
- moultano 16y ago>over 7/100 made up words appearing in a set of search results Again, that's not the allegation, that's the evidence. The allegation is that bing is using data that essentially amounts to a wholesale copying of google's results.
- Aaronontheweb 16y agoYou missed the point I was making, which is that asking a company to fork over expensive information that a competitor like Google would kill for in the name of answering a question about 7 queries is disporportionate.
- moultano 16y agoForking over data is not required. Making a clear public statement would suffice.
- earl 16y agoExpensive information? Please. I'm not asking for all weights, I'm asking for 1/1000 weights. If it's tiny, then sharing it should be inconsequential. And no bullshit about competitors or spammers please -- it's not as if anyone is unaware that ranking well in Google organic results is good :rolleyes:
- Aaronontheweb 16y agoWhat would be the value in knowing that weight without knowing what it's relative to?
- earl 16y agoI thought it went without saying that the relevant coefficient should be taken from a unit normal vector or some other indication of relative magnitude should be given.
- jongraehl 16y agoI prefer expectation (over typical queries) of weighted variance of the feature, divided by the total weighted variance of all features. (most likely sqrt(variance) instead, but whatever power you prefer).