Hello,
About the searching for websites it rung a bell in my head and this was what I was thinking http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1882341271080460143 Its a pretty good talk. About 5 minutes in he talks about navigational queries and cites this paper - "Understanding user goals in web search" International World Wide Web Conference archive Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=988672.988675&coll=portal&dl=ACM&type=series&idx=SERIES968&part=series&WantType=Proceedings&title=WWW Hope that helps, -Leon On 7/4/07, Kei Cheung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Karen, Your questions remind me of the following classic article written by Robert Robbins on "Challenges in the Human Genome Project". http://www.esp.org/umdnj.pdf Although it doesn't directly answer the questions, in the "Nomenclature Problems" section (p. 20-21), it discusses the significant problem of inconsistent knowledge representation. It says that it's mistake to believe that terminology fluidity is not an issue biological in database design. It also says that many biologists don't realize that, in a database bulit with 5% error in the definition of individual concepts, a query that joins across 15 concepts has less than 50% chance of returning an adequate answer. The section also points out the importance of formal representation of scientific knowledge in addressing the inconsistency and nomenclature problems. Semantic Web and standard ontologies provide a solution to these database problems. We just don't simply convert an existing database syntactically into a semantic web format, but we also need to do careful semantic conversion to eliminate as many errors, ambiguities, and inconsistencies as possible in order to reduce the costs of knowledge retrieval and discovery. -Kei Skinner, Karen (NIH/NIDA) [E] wrote: >Recently I read somewhere (on this list, a blog, a news story, where...?) an assertion that struck me as an interesting passing fact at the time. As I recall, it indicated that more websites are accessed via a search engine than by typing a URL into a browser web address bar. > >Alas, I did not save the reference, and now I am looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack. Namely, what is the exact assertion, who asserted it, and where did they make it? If anyone in the world has this information or knows how to get it, or or has related data, I imagine they would belong to this list. I would be most grateful for any useful pointer. > >Along this same vein, if anyone has any statistics, data, anecodotes or information related to the cost of > >(1) "friction" arising from inefficient or inappropriate efforts at information retrieval >and >(2) the cost of "negative knowledge" about an existing resource or data, > >these, too, would be helpful. > >(For example, with respect to #2 above, we are all familiar with comparison shopping for goods and services. We seek data/information about prices and quality , but at what point does the expenditure of that effort exceed the value of the information learned?) > >I am not looking for examples at the level of a philosophy or ecnomics Ph.D. thesis, but rather a few examples in the sciences that can be used at the level of an "elevator speech." > > >Karen Skinner >Deputy Director for Science and Technology Development >Division of Basic Neuroscience and Behavior Research >National Institute on Drug Abuse/NIH > > > > > > >
