Google tweaked search 450 times in 2007

Google rejiggered its search algorithm 450 times last year, in an effort to improve the quality of results.

Google is typically tight-lipped about it the inner workings of its search business, but there are a few nuggets worth looking at in a Popular Mechanics interview with Udi Manber, the Google vice president who oversees search quality.

The job of the algorithm is to best match Web pages with people's search terms. One tweak the company tried last week was increasing the "diversity" of search results so the listed Web pages would cover a broader scope in an attempt to compensate for the ambiguities of search terms, he said.

While some might see the industry of search engine optimisation (SEO), which strives to get Web sites higher placement on search sites, as gaming the system, Manber said that at least a basic amount would make his life easier.

"I wish people would put more effort into thinking about how other people will find them and putting the right keywords onto their pages," he said.

He also said Google doesn't adjust search results by hand.

"If we find, for a particular query, that result No. 4 should be result No. 1, we do not have the capability to manually change it," he said. "We have to find what weakness in the algorithm caused that result and find a general solution to that, evaluate whether a general solution really works and if it's better, and then launch a general solution."

Advertisement

Talkback 4 comments

    Google Schmoogle Lord Watchdog -- 18/04/08

    "Google rejiggered its search algorithm 450 times last year, in an effort to improve the quality of results."

    Shame it didn't work. "Improvement" in their eyes is mind over matter. Bring on the Microsoft-Yahoo merger.

    What happened? Nehmo Sergheyev -- 18/04/08

    I'm still in the dark regarding what happened. Unless specific examples with details are given, I won't understand.
    And how do we know "450" is accurate? What did someone do 450 times? From many search results I get, I'm sure the results were "tweaked ". Considering the current capabilities of software, It couldn't have been done any other way.

    Search Tweaking - Google Manish Gaur -- 19/04/08

    I personally feel (my opinion only) that tweaking algorithm 450 times is more related to make search better. Anything better than current situation should be taken as a step forward. Internet and Enterprise search is moving toward a new era where other market players like Microsoft, FAST (now Microsoft FAST), Varity and autonomy are moving in to advanced and refined version of intelligent search. Coming months/years will define their capabilities and their placement within Gartner's chart. Thanks, Manish

    Google is not best way. Anonymous -- 21/04/08

    Google is not best way. Try metasearch http://www.tripleme.com which fetching results from Google,Yahoo,MSN on one screen in three columns side by side - 3 in 1 solution.

    According to TripleMe users statistic data of 20000 requests, 40% of results found in the Google column, 31% of results found in the Yahoo column and 27% of results found in the MSN Live column.

    So, if you use only Google - you lost 60% of potential results !!!

    3 in 1 solution is definitely the way of searching today.

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Blogs

  • Darren Greenwood Telecom NZ savings damage prospects
    If Telecom NZ wants to have any of the NZ$1.5 billion the government intends to spend on its new broadband network, it had better think long and hard before offshoring 1500 jobs.
  • Array iiNet: The whys and what nows
    Last week the Federal Court ruled that internet service providers are not responsible for copyright violation by their customers. This is an important decision not just for iiNet, which spent around $4 million defending the case, but for all ISPs in Australia and, indeed, globally.
  • Array Govt, hurry up with releasing data
    A programmer scraped data from the My School website to make some really cool heat maps showing regions of smart schools — no thanks to the government, which didn't supply the data in any useful kind of format.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured