3 ms·
Though the analysis is interesting, it is not "Machine Learning". There is no test/training data set, no prediction, no model selection. It is just plain old, b
by paraschopra 17y ago
Though the analysis is interesting, it is not "Machine Learning". There is no test/training data set, no prediction, no model selection. It is just plain old, but extremely useful correlation analysis.
If someone is interested in a similar kind of correlation (and regression) analysis for website conversion rate, have a look at the study I did a study recently - http://www.wingify.com/case-studies/predictive-web-analytics-conversion-case-study.php http://www.wingify.com/case-studies/predictive-web-analytics...
- randfish 17y agoActually, that's inaccurate. Please do read through the entire post. Although it begins with correlation data, the conclusion reached halfway through the post is that more sophisticated models are required, which is where the machine learning is put into use - a large number of features about links and on-page elements as well as derivatives of these features - modeled against training data (10K SERPs), then shown against a different set of 10K SERPs.
- paraschopra 17y agoThat is very, very hazy. In my opinion the article just says "a machine learning model that maps to the search results and produces a result that's considerably better correlated with rankings than any single metric" without any other information on what the model is, how it is made, what is its validity. Please correct me if I missed something in the article, but where exactly is that machine learning model described?