Google Phrase Based Penalties, Filters, Re-Ranking Results, etc etc etc

8 comments

WebmasterWorld has been promoting a series of threads about -950 this or that which DG summed up as the MSSA penalty. Recently some of these threads have looked into phrase based patent applications (which were previously covered by Bill Slawski here). Is Google using phrases to find related phrases to create a LSI type algorithm while nuking lower quality content?

Comments

LSI? nah. LSI type algorithm

LSI? nah.

Quote:
LSI type algorithm while nuking lower quality content?

Think clustering.

PaIR resources

Hey Gang - I have been following the trail of Phrase Based Indexing and Retrieval for while now. Brett and I have been chatting over the weekend and I started a thread at WMW for PaIR alone.

I have written 4 articles on Phrase Based Optimization as well.

For reference I have put a page together with links to ALL the related information, patents, articles and discussions on the system.

Phrase Based Indexing and Retrieval resources ....

IT IS NOT really a 'LSI Type' algo as LSI is far more limited in scope and abilities. It may have been the genesis, but I dare say PaIR whoops some LSA/I ass.... he he

PaIR Today

Dave, hopefully PaIR is on the mark. If this new layer is not turned up incrementally, PaIR could whoop more than some LSA/I ass, sites that didn’t antisipate something like this or prepair for a Phrase Based Search may take a heavy beating in the SERPS.

And will the high priests in the Google theocracy react swiftly?

Another thread

Another thread moving along those lines is here

G doesn't like BIG changes. Since Big Daddy they try to lay low. Even had the 'weather report' promising no major shifts for Xmas. So IMO, they'd ease it in.. turning the doals slowly as not to cause a ruckus.

nice

good deductions :) good information.. thanks for validating some ideas and giving me some new ones..

Validation?

Not sure if anything has been 'validated' at this point, just an interesting theory. I personally tracked the beast because there were far too many Patents relating to the method, to be a smoke screen. Seems more likely that 'where there is smoke..there is fire' type of thang.

For me at this point it's simply 'on the radar'.... it was an interesting study tho...

It's good to see some

It's good to see some discussion going on about these patent applications.

An official Google blog entry from November 26th, 2005, written by Anna Patterson, noted that they were expanding the size of their database that day by some large amount (We wanted something special for our birthday...). It made me a little suspicious that they implemented some aspects of the recall search engine that she demo'ed with the Internet Archives. The patent applications, especially the Multiple Index one seemed to validate that assumption somewhat.

Yet, there are always other things going on. For instance, last week Google had a patent granted that also describes an Extended index. So, phrase based indexing could account for a supplemental index, yet so could the process described in this newly granted patent.

While looking at any of the patents or patent applications from the search engines, I'd caution to look at the concepts expressed, the assumptions made, the reasons given for different approaches as the real takeaways, and not the idea that a specific process as described in a patent filing was implemented and the patent filing provides a roadmap on how to move forward with SEO. I suspect that I'm preaching to the choir here with most of the people who read threadwatch and participate here.

SEO Karma

I hear ya Bill, seems that caveat is required everytime.. Like I was saying on WMW earlier... just absorb the conteptual part and continue on with the task at hand. The real world data ultimately teaches more....

Thanks for the other links.... off to read them now

Dave

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.