3 ms·
Great job! I encourage you to continue improving it. I pasted a Paul Graham essay and the results were telling: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp1.
by sillysaurus 14y ago
Great job! I encourage you to continue improving it.
I pasted a Paul Graham essay and the results were telling:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp1.png https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp1.png
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp2.png https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp2.png
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp3.png https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp3.png
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp4.png https://dl.dropbox.com/u/315/random_pics/nlp4.png
In short, the results aren't relevant at all -- either to the author or to his audience. (The third screenshot is particularly conspicuous.)
I can think of some domains where this could be pretty handy -- you should try feeding your algorithm a stream of tweets and see what happens.
All in all, this hasn't been done before and was presented quite nicely. Well done.
- ken 14y agoAnother test case: I pasted a couple paragraphs of John Gruber's Kindle review in there, and it shows me (only) "Fleetwood Mac" (derived from the phrase "my Mac"), and "I Love" (the country music song, from the sentence "I love glowing screens"). It skipped terms that seem to me much more obvious links, like "iPhone", "iPad", "TiVo", "ATM", "Kindle", "credit card", "supermarket", or "e-ink".