Google也有像Yahoo那样的人力审查
|
源代码网整理以下 ![]() 源代码网整理以下 源代码网整理以下 他基于显示Google搜索的referer、访问者的IP地址是Google所拥有的地址、访问者的动作比Googlebot慢等事实(至少他认为是事实),就作出了一个结论:访问者不是Googlebot,也就是说,不是机械而是人访问的。他经过这么一番推理,得出了这么一个结论。但他这个推理对不对呢?当然了,“推理不对、结论对”的现象,有时还是存在的。但他这个,至少让我说的话,我还真难说对不对。 源代码网整理以下 不过这件事让我想起一件老事:Google承认过它们有10000人的队伍,就干人力审查网站的事情。我是从Seattle Conference on Scalability知道这件事的。这是个在2007/6/23举行的会议,会上,Google的Marissa Mayer做了如下发言: 源代码网整理以下 …they have 10,000 human evaluators who are always manually checking the relevance of various results. 源代码网整理以下 当然了,该会距今已有1年以上的时间了,也许,这一年多的时间里,Google已取消了这支队伍,已无一人的职工从事人力审查?我说不准。没见到相关的官方报道,也没听说过相关的民间传闻。当然了,我没见过、没听说过的,不等于就不存在。 源代码网整理以下 话收不住了,接着说吧。还有篇英文的文章,内容也是关于Google的审查方面的,Technology Review对Google的Director of Research,Peter Norvig的一个访问。访问中,受访者有这样的回答: 源代码网整理以下 We test it in lots of ways. At the grossest level, we track what usersare clicking on. If they click on the number-one result, and thenthey’re done, that probably means they got what they wanted. If they’rescrolling down, page after page, and reformulating the query, then weknow the results aren’t what they wanted. Another way we do it is torandomly select specific queries and hire people to say how good ourresults are. These are just contractors that we hire who give theirjudgment. We train them on how to identify spamand other bad sites, and then we record their judgments and trackagainst that. It’s more of a gold standard because it’s someone givinga real opinion, but of course, since there’s a human in the loop, wecan’t afford to do as much of it. We also invite people into the labs,or sometimes we go into homes and observe them as they do searches. Itprovides insight into what people are having difficulty with. 源代码网整理以下 这个访问是什么时候采访的,我没查到。说白了,我根本就没查,想睡了。因此,英语也不能给大家翻译了,这已不是第一次了,实在是抱歉。 源代码网供稿. |

