Discussions

[1] 2 Next »

This discussion relates to Technology Review's article Wolfram Alpha and Google Face Off.

• 
  smihael
  

  Posts:
  1

  Avg Rating:
  

  

  Reply

  05/05/2009 11:23 AM

  you can do conversions in google too

  http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=10+pounds+in+kilograms&btnG=Search
  
  http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=10+EUR+in+USD&btnG=Search
  
  more features are here:
  http://www.google.com/experimental/

  Rate this comment:
• 
  ItStartsWithUs
  

  Posts:
  2

  Avg Rating:
  

  

  Reply

  05/05/2009 12:27 PM

  comparisons not quite applicable

  This is fair and interesting data, but my concern is that you're not using these two sites appropriately. From what I understand, one of the chief benefits of Wolfram Alpha is that it can produce results based on natural-language questions, whereas Google relies on more machine-based queries.
  
  Putting in multiple-word keywords naturally favors Google, because you're not really asking a question there - you're just searching for data. In this instance, Google is most likely going to return more of the "right" kind of data that you're looking for, because they've had 10 years to finetune their algorithm in this way.
  
  I think a more practical test would be to think about a few real-life questions you want answered, and then put in the best Google search you can think of, and compare that to simply asking Wolfram Alpha the question.
  
  These sites/engines are tools, and it's tough to compare them by telling them to do the same thing the same way. You have to use them to their strengths.
  
  Thanks for the article, though - interesting data. Can't wait to try it out.
  
  Nate

  Rate this comment:
  • 
    david.talbot@technologyreview.com
    

    Posts:
    6

    Avg Rating:
    

    

    Reply

    05/05/2009 03:23 PM

    Re: comparisons not quite applicable

    Post a pair of queries and I'll try it out.   But I think it's fair to use identical search terms -- otherwise how can you compare the two?  
    Anyway, I'd wager that most average users don't/won't know how to customize a query (though they might learn over time).  Thanks for your comment.

    Rate this comment:
    • 
      wfolta
      

      Posts:
      1

      Avg Rating:
      

      

      Reply

      05/05/2009 04:17 PM

      Re: comparisons not quite applicable

      I think what the previoues poster meant was to use natural language:
      
      "How many pounds in a 10 kilogram?" versus "10 kilogram pound". The idea being that Google does not parse your query as anything other than keywords, while Alpha apparently does look for more meaning.
      
      So when you use a keyword-oriented query ("10 kilograms pound") you are favoring Google.
      
      If it's true that Alpha actually parses your query, it will ultimately yield a far more natural query than keyword orientation.
      
      It's instinctive to us, having been warped by Google queries, to use "10 kilograms pound", but that's certainly not the way we'd ask another human and it's certainly more open to misunderstanding than "How many pounds is 10 kilograms?" or "10 kilograms is how many pounds" or even the shortened "10 kilograms as pounds".

      Rate this comment:
    • 
      ItStartsWithUs
      

      Posts:
      2

      Avg Rating:
      

      

      Reply

      05/05/2009 04:21 PM

      Re: comparisons not quite applicable

      Thanks for the response. You're right - identical queries ARE fair, but let's try both kinds out. You just did the Google-type queries, now let's run some natural language questions (your pick of which).
      
      Nature:
      What is the cheetah's top speed?
      Are any two snowflakes alike?
      What is the genetic sequence of the common fruit fly?
      
      Commerce:
      Where can I see The Soloist in Milwaukee?
      How many copies of Harry Potter have been sold?
      What are the 100 biggest companies in the world?
      
      Astronomy:
      How much larger than earth is jupiter?
      How far away is the sun?
      How many solar systems are in the Milky Way?
      
      Thanks for the opportunity to run some of these!
      
      Nate

      Rate this comment:
      • 
        david.talbot@technologyreview.com
        

        Posts:
        6

        Avg Rating:
        

        

        Reply

        05/06/2009 09:02 PM

        Re: comparisons not quite applicable

        
        Nate I ran those searches, see this new blog:
        
        http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/23495/

        Rate this comment:
  • 
    jgrivolla
    

    Posts:
    1

    Avg Rating:
    

    

    Reply

    05/06/2009 04:56 AM

    Re: comparisons not quite applicable

    A search engine, and even more so a question answering system such as Alpha, is supposed to respond to an information need. However, none of your queries actually express what information you are looking for. It seems that you are just throwing random keywords at it to see what comes out. Did you even have an idea what you were hoping to obtain?
    "Microsoft Apple" could mean just anything, and I as a human have no idea what you meant:
    - What are the top products sold by each?
    - How many employees do they have?
    - Who are the companies' CEOs?
    - Which name is longer?
    - What funny anagrams of "Microsoft Apple" are there?
    
    Why did you always use pairs of names? That doesn't look like a typical query at all to me. Would you ever use the queries you tested here? What for?
    
    Alpha is a system for answering factual questions, there was not a single question in all your queries, and I wouldn't even know what questions were supposedly implied by your keyword queries.
    
    Questions would be:
    - What was the population of France in 1980?
    - What was the population of France in 2000?
    - What is the population growth in France between 1980 and 2000? (so that it would have to deduce answers mathematically from the data)
    
    Obviously you may want to ask more difficult things, but keep in mind that you need to actually ASK something. Random words with no indication of what you are actually looking for are not helpful.
    
    Google falls back on "give me a list of web pages that happen to contain the given words, irrespective of whether they have anything to do with what I'm looking for." Alpha does not.

    Rate this comment:
  • 
    david.talbot@technologyreview.com
    

    Posts:
    6

    Avg Rating:
    

    

    Reply

    05/06/2009 09:01 PM

    Re: comparisons not quite applicable

    Wolfram did fine on the France population questions -- see new post:
    
    http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/23495/

    Rate this comment:
• 
  shashid
  

  Posts:
  1

  Avg Rating:
  

  

  Reply

  05/05/2009 01:25 PM

  Fundamentals of this test.

  I think the fundamentals of Google and Wolfram are different. Google is a "Search" tool where as Wolfram is a "Lookup" tool.
  
  If my intention is to Search for information across internet, I will use Google. If I am looking for an answer to a straight forward ques, I will use tools like ask or yahoo answers or wiki or Wolfram.
  Google too has the facility of "Lookup" but you need to use keywords, as you have stated in your example. If you search "10 kg pounds" in Google it will point you to sites having those words and that can do the conversion for you. If you give "10 kg in pounds" it will answer your question with precisely. So comparing Google to Wolfram is like comparing apples to oranges.

  Rate this comment:
  • 
    david.talbot@technologyreview.com
    

    Posts:
    6

    Avg Rating:
    

    

    Reply

    05/05/2009 03:32 PM

    Re: Fundamentals of this test.

    The "apples and oranges" criticism is valid in that Google and Wolfram are quite different.   Google mainly searches the web (but also does some computation for you, such as for metric conversion questions), while Wolfram mainly tries to calculate or summon answers from its own databases (but also points you to Wikipedia entries and source URLS).
    The question is: if you want data (or a calculated answer) does Wolfram clearly do a better job--as it seeks to?  My limited comparison shone a tiny bit of light on this question.  Users will be the ultimate judge.

    Rate this comment:

[1] 2 Next »