Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Wolfram Alpha and Google Face Off

Our exclusive test shows how the two Web engines compare when given the same queries.

By David Talbot

Tuesday, May 05, 2009

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

(See answers to readers' queries, submitted in response to this article, here.)

Computation engine: The new Wolfram Alpha engine computes answers based on search terms. In this case, entering “Sydney New York” produced a flight path and comparative data on the two cities, much of which can be easily found via Google too.
Credit: Wolfram Research

Last week, as physicist Stephen Wolfram was demonstrating his new Web-based "computation engine"--Wolfram Alpha--to the public, Google announced a data-centric service of its own. Alpha accesses databases that are maintained by Wolfram Research, or licensed from others, and deploys formulas and algorithms to compute answers for searchers.

Using some prelaunch log-in credentials provided by the Wolfram team, I decided to run my own Wolfram Alpha versus Google test. I used a handful of search terms that could produce data-centric answers and tried variations in a few cases to see what might happen.

This was an effort to get beyond the characterizations and produce some real data. I also wanted to explore the claims made during my visit to Wolfram Research last week: that Alpha can add unique value in computing answers based on your search queries.

Here's what I entered, and what I found.

SEARCH TERM: Microsoft Apple

WOLFRAM ALPHA: I got side-by-side tables and graphics on the stock prices and data on the two companies, plus a chart plotting the price of both stocks over time.

GOOGLE: The top hits were mostly news stories, from major and minor publications, containing both words.

VARIATION: When I changed the Google search term to just "Microsoft" or just "Apple," I got a chart with today's stock price up top; when I clicked that link, I received tons of information--comparable to what Alpha provides--but only on the single company.

SEARCH TERM: Sydney New York

WOLFRAM ALPHA: I got tables showing the distance between the two cities in miles, kilometers, meters, even nautical miles; a map of the world with the optimal flight path; and the fact that the trip spans 0.4 of the earth's circumference. I learned how long it would take to make the trip: 18.1 hours flying; 13 hours for a sound wave, 74 milliseconds for a light beam in fiber, and 53 milliseconds for a light beam traveling in a vacuum. I also got comparative populations, elevation in meters, and current local times.

GOOGLE: I got a mix of things: a form for finding flights between Sydney and New York; a Google Maps-plotted list of businesses in New York City that contain the word "Sydney"; and links to the municipal government of Sidney, a small town in upstate New York.

VARIATION: When I tried "Sydney New York distance" (adding the word "distance"), Wolfram gave me only the distance information mentioned above while Google gave me links to distance-finding websites. I opened the first one, was able to enter "New York" and "Sydney" in some forms, and wound up with much the same information provided by Wolfram (but without the light-beam and sound-wave details).

SEARCH TERM: 10 pounds kilograms

Story continues below


WOLFRAM ALPHA: The site informed me that it interpreted my search term as an effort to multiply "10 pounds" by "1 kilogram" and gave me this result: 4.536 kg2 (kilograms squared) or 22.05 lb2 (pounds squared).

GOOGLE: Google gave me links to various metric conversion sites.

Comments


  • smihael
    05/05/2009
    Posts:1
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
  • 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

    ItStartsWith...
    05/05/2009
    Posts:2
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    • 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.

      david.talbot...
      05/05/2009
      Posts:6
      Avg Rating:
      4/5

This discussion has been moved to our discussions forum.

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

The Marcellus Shale Gas Rush
Technology Review November/December 2009

Current Issue

Natural Gas Changes the Energy Map
The United States has vast supplies of this cleaner fossil fuel. But how should we use it?
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.