Comments for Information Retrieval Gupf http://irgupf.com Information Retrieval Research, Issues, and Discussion Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:19:48 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 Comment on Search in Social Media by Weekly Search & Social News: 02/02/2010 | Search Engine Journal http://irgupf.com/2010/01/29/search-in-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-7335 Weekly Search & Social News: 02/02/2010 | Search Engine Journal Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:19:48 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1175#comment-7335 [...] Search in Social Media – IR GUPF [...] [...] Search in Social Media – IR GUPF [...]

]]> Comment on Kasparov and Good Interaction Design by Biweekly Links – 01-25-2010 « God, Your Book Is Great !! http://irgupf.com/2010/01/25/kasparov-and-good-interaction-design/comment-page-1/#comment-7152 Biweekly Links – 01-25-2010 « God, Your Book Is Great !! Tue, 26 Jan 2010 05:49:48 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1170#comment-7152 [...] Kasparov and Good Interaction Design A commentary on a NYTimes article on Chess, Humans and Computers. There are lot of good nuggets of [...] [...] Kasparov and Good Interaction Design A commentary on a NYTimes article on Chess, Humans and Computers. There are lot of good nuggets of [...]

]]> Comment on More and Faster versus Smarter and More Effective by Information Retrieval Gupf » Kasparov and Good Interaction Design http://irgupf.com/2009/04/30/more-and-faster-versus-smarter-and-more-effective/comment-page-1/#comment-7145 Information Retrieval Gupf » Kasparov and Good Interaction Design Mon, 25 Jan 2010 23:00:21 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=559#comment-7145 [...] also two of my previous posts, More and Faster versus Smarter and More Effective and A Bird in the [...] [...] also two of my previous posts, More and Faster versus Smarter and More Effective and A Bird in the [...]

]]> Comment on Good Interaction Design Trumps Smart Algorithms by Information Retrieval Gupf » Kasparov and Good Interaction Design http://irgupf.com/2009/03/25/good-interaction-design-trumps-smart-algorithms/comment-page-1/#comment-7144 Information Retrieval Gupf » Kasparov and Good Interaction Design Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:59:36 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=303#comment-7144 [...] also Tessa Lau’s post about how good interaction design trumps smart algorithms: I come to the field of HCI via a background in AI, having learned the hard way that good [...] [...] also Tessa Lau’s post about how good interaction design trumps smart algorithms: I come to the field of HCI via a background in AI, having learned the hard way that good [...]

]]> Comment on Good Interaction Design II: Just Ask by Information Retrieval Gupf » Kasparov and Good Interaction Design http://irgupf.com/2009/11/04/good-interaction-ii-just-ask/comment-page-1/#comment-7143 Information Retrieval Gupf » Kasparov and Good Interaction Design Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:59:20 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1032#comment-7143 [...] similar to some of the other results I’ve reported on in the past.  For example, see this paper by Amatriain: Data is always important, but what struck me in the writeup was his discovery that the biggest [...] [...] similar to some of the other results I’ve reported on in the past.  For example, see this paper by Amatriain: Data is always important, but what struck me in the writeup was his discovery that the biggest [...]

]]> Comment on What You Can Find Out by jeremy http://irgupf.com/2010/01/12/what-you-can-find-out/comment-page-1/#comment-7120 jeremy Sun, 24 Jan 2010 02:24:50 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1150#comment-7120 @Dinesh: What I mean by it will be a paper submission to CIKM 2010. I'll let you know if it gets in :-) @Dinesh: What I mean by it will be a paper submission to CIKM 2010. I’ll let you know if it gets in :-)

]]> Comment on What You Can Find Out by Weekly Search & Social News: 01/19/2010 | Search Engine Journal http://irgupf.com/2010/01/12/what-you-can-find-out/comment-page-1/#comment-6929 Weekly Search & Social News: 01/19/2010 | Search Engine Journal Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:15:09 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1150#comment-6929 [...] What You Can Find Out – Irgupf [...] [...] What You Can Find Out – Irgupf [...]

]]> Comment on Search versus Recommendation: Not The Only Tension by waqas http://irgupf.com/2010/01/05/more-tensions/comment-page-1/#comment-6861 waqas Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:50:54 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1131#comment-6861 YouTube wants to get from users spending “15 minutes a day on the site” closer to the “five hours in front of the television.” i am totally agree with you on this. we can save our time and also can entertained ourselves by suggesting to youtube about our choice. can you tell me either the youtube will allow all kind of movies and clips for the users? YouTube wants to get from users spending “15 minutes a day on the site” closer to the “five hours in front of the television.”
i am totally agree with you on this. we can save our time and also can entertained ourselves by suggesting to youtube about our choice. can you tell me either the youtube will allow all kind of movies and clips for the users?

]]> Comment on What You Can Find Out by dinesh vadhia http://irgupf.com/2010/01/12/what-you-can-find-out/comment-page-1/#comment-6857 dinesh vadhia Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:42:38 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1150#comment-6857 Your post is one of the most interesting (and clear) I've read in a while as the various threads are tied together. Both Mayer and you refer to the challenges of operating at vast scale (ie. "... capable of operating at vast scale.", "Computational resources are going to be a challenge."), and it maybe obvious what is meant but what do you mean by it? Your post is one of the most interesting (and clear) I’ve read in a while as the various threads are tied together. Both Mayer and you refer to the challenges of operating at vast scale (ie. “… capable of operating at vast scale.”, “Computational resources are going to be a challenge.”), and it maybe obvious what is meant but what do you mean by it?

]]> Comment on What You Can Find Out by jeremy http://irgupf.com/2010/01/12/what-you-can-find-out/comment-page-1/#comment-6824 jeremy Wed, 13 Jan 2010 01:34:30 +0000 http://irgupf.com/?p=1150#comment-6824 But isn't Jeopardy-search still known-item, fact lookup search? I'm interested more in open-ended questions. Exploratory information needs, where the goal is to understand the relationship between different pieces of knowledge, just as much as it is finding those pieces of knowledge in the first place. Right now, there seems to be a feeling that the only way we can understand the relationship between different pieces of knowledge is to be able to classify the data into some sort of taxonomy (or even folksonomy, I don't care) and then use those semantics to form the basis of our comparisons and organization. That's the parametric approach, where you classes form the functional structure around which you organize. I would like to propose a research agenda in which we turn this around. Instead of relying on pre-existing structure, or on relying on our ability to do entity extraction to create that structure, why not let the user sort out the information he or she finds. As the user is doing the sorting, giving explicit feedback on what data is related and what is not related, the search engine can non-parametrically start to find information that follows the same similarity/dissimilarity user-defined structure. Don't pre-compute the structure. Let the user grow the structure organically, as the process evolves. Maybe that is the way we've always done things. But it is not the way that online information seeking systems are set up. Time to bring 'em back into traditional user behavior models? But isn’t Jeopardy-search still known-item, fact lookup search?

I’m interested more in open-ended questions. Exploratory information needs, where the goal is to understand the relationship between different pieces of knowledge, just as much as it is finding those pieces of knowledge in the first place.

Right now, there seems to be a feeling that the only way we can understand the relationship between different pieces of knowledge is to be able to classify the data into some sort of taxonomy (or even folksonomy, I don’t care) and then use those semantics to form the basis of our comparisons and organization. That’s the parametric approach, where you classes form the functional structure around which you organize.

I would like to propose a research agenda in which we turn this around. Instead of relying on pre-existing structure, or on relying on our ability to do entity extraction to create that structure, why not let the user sort out the information he or she finds. As the user is doing the sorting, giving explicit feedback on what data is related and what is not related, the search engine can non-parametrically start to find information that follows the same similarity/dissimilarity user-defined structure.

Don’t pre-compute the structure. Let the user grow the structure organically, as the process evolves.

Maybe that is the way we’ve always done things. But it is not the way that online information seeking systems are set up. Time to bring ‘em back into traditional user behavior models?

]]>