[WikiEN-l] SmartWikiSearch, a similarity search engine for Wikipedia

[Jay Litwyn]

<WJhonson at aol.com> wrote in message 
news://news.gmane.org/d55.57c09b43.37c33b60@aol.com...
> In a message dated 8/23/2009 4:53:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> brewhaha at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca writes:
>
>
>> The search for "bees" and "flowers" suggests "pollination". I do not see
>> anything mindless about that. That is a human association>>
>
> -----------------
>
> You're not understanding me.  An article discussing bees and mentioning
> that they pollinate flowers IS a human association.  I didn't say it 
> wasn't.
> However the meta-network of *all* such associations to the nth degree of
> relatedness is not something a human can encompass in one bite.  That's 
> one
> thing.
>
> What I was stating is that this meta-network itself, is created by a
> computer algorithm, which ITSELF has no mind.  It has no idea what the 
> terms mean,
> or refer to, or imply.  It only knows that they are associated in some 
> way.
> It creates this meta-network and ranks the associations in a mindless way,
> i.e. without comprehension.  That's what I meant.

People maintain the database (or meta-network, as you call it)--a collection 
of
data and pointers, of words and associations. It is not important that the 
machine
has no comprehension of links (pointers) in the database or eigenvectors 
that
it is calculating. As long as human input is reprezented in that database, 
there is a
foundation. Yes, it is a mechanical process, like anything on computers, 
complete
with errors and an incomplete understanding of idiom. The point is that it 
delivers
the impression of a smart search.
_______
Cat Zen Master: What is the sound of one paw slashing?