It's pointless to say that Wolfram Alpha awaits natural language questions. Many users will just use it like Google, maybe because they don't get the difference, maybe because they're in a hurry or too lazy. So it's obvious that there will be disappointments. This will not be the fault of Wolfram Research but let's face it, it will reveal how dumb a crowd is out there on the net.
Also, I think many users don't really take time or know how to formulate queries that would narrow results down to what their are looking for.
Luckily, Google is here since more than 10 years, it has a lot of stats about user behavior and past queries and it has its ranking mechanism. It learns and improves.
First, I think that Wolfram Alpha will also learn and improve with time. It's still a baby.
But anyway, any query or question will return inaccurate results if it lacks contextual information. Asking "New York Hawaii?" to a travel agent or to a football fan will give different results...
Just entering two words in a web engine could give many different answers in many different domains. With Google the results are sorted according to the users majority and many of them (well, us) are happy with the result. But if what you're looking for is on the sides of the Gaussian chart, you must add context.
(Btw: on Google, if you enter "Paris Hilton" and press "I'm feeling lucky", you get the Wikipedia page on Paris Hilton, but if you enter "Hilton Paris" you get the website of Hotel Hilton in Paris.)
I think formulating a phrase, a question, can provide a lot about the context. With Google, users learned to enter one of two keywords and to look up in the returned links which ones could contain the information they need. With Wolfram Alpha, they will re-learn how to formulate questions and they will get direct answers, not a list of links.
My worry is that it will suit journalists and students in search of quick "facts" but will fail to satisfy more demanding users, since access to source data is presumably not that easy (I haven't tried too hard but it doesn't look like it). The more scientific users will be suspicious of anything where they can't check the inputs. "Garbage in..." Maybe not, and I wish them luck since I find google useful and mindless in roughly equal measure.
On an utterly trivial note, since rumour has it (I can't actually remember that far back) that we spent a term together in the same junior school class, I typed the name of the school into both Alpha and Google. Alpha produced no result; google its usual 8m or so. So I tried his secondary (high school) level, figuring that Eton ought to produce some sort of result, since it's arguably the most famous school in the world. Sort of...google produced the school's website straight up, as you would expect. And Alpha? No mention of the school - apparently Eton is a tribal dialect in Cameroon spoken by only 52000 souls. My conclusion? I haven't got much further than figuring that particle physicists are admirably unsentimental.
Not to get too caught up in pop-culture and consumerism, but if I were Wolfram I would be working hard on those two areas. For a mass amount of people to adopt it, it will need to take queries along the lines of "Star Trek Los Angeles" and give you all of the show times and theaters for that day. That would be a better solution than what Google or Yahoo offer, or if you entered "New York Hawaii" it would go beyond comparing the two places and would present all of the different travel options from New York to Hawaii. Wolfram should go beyond an academic search tool to something that can help people get through their every day lives. I think it will probably be able to do this over time, and if so, it may be a breakthrough that lives up to the hype.
The author is writing search words in a way that he has lernt how to write such words in google. He even states that he _makes assumtions_ in how he's search words should be interpreted. These assumtions can he only have acuired from interaction with google (or similar search engine). However, the specific paths of answers and the compuations involved in Alpha relies heavily on correct search input assumtions. These assumtions are mostly derived from the use of our natural language. In it's most simple form; the word "in" can make an enormous difference. And where google's natural language interpretation ends with the word "in", this is only where Alpha begins...
I don't think that it's even attempting to face off or win any sort of battle against Google. Their intent is completely different. If anything I believe the services will be complimentary.
In every issue you’ll learn about new technologies and new ideas FIRST. You’ll read in-depth features that investigate how these technologies work. If you’re in charge of the strategic direction of your organization, or if you simply care where the road to the future is leading, you’ll benefit by subscribing today!
Making Drugs Survive Longer in Blood : Longer-lasting drugs could mean more effective... http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/24150/ 12/14/2009 01:00 PM
As I predicted here at TR ALtaRock has suspended it's geothermal drilling at Geysers http://bit.ly/7iegaV owing to the Basel debacle 12/12/2009 08:02 AM
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address
nboeing
1
exactly the right test