inconsistencies web search performance

[c478923 at showme.missouri.edu]

To say that Web search engines are free may be true in the sense that you
need not pay money to use them. But you or perhaps your employer do pay,
time being money.  


Jim Borwick <c478923 at showme.missouri.edu>
"Brevity is the soul of lingerie"
			-Dorothy Parker	

On Fri, 7 Nov 1997, Ernest Perez wrote:

> Nicholas G. Tomaiuolo, MLS wrote:
> > The point is that as a professional searcher who has seen the accuracy of 
> > powerful engines including Dialog, BRS, STN and reliable CD ROM products, I'm 
> > wondering when we are going to be offered this type of accuracy with the web.
> > "The Web made simple" book, and "Search Engine Secrets ofthe Pros" (PC World 
> > article) nothwithstanding -- these engines including AltaVista, Lycos, InfoSeek, 
> > et al, do not perform as they should on a consistent basis.  Is this vexing 
> > anyone besides me?
> 
> Although I understand the irritation arising from the inconsistencies of
> the search engines, I think we're really beating the subject to death. 
> 
> I'd like to make some observations:
> 
>   ** Yes, there are inconsistencies in the indexing algorithms and
> search syntax/vocabulary. Just like there are lots of different brands
> of word processors or spreadsheets or automobiles. "That's the American
> way," or more broadly just the way of humans who think they have a
> better idea. Why not pick the one that appears to satisfy you best and
> leave it at that? Free market choice, etc.
> 
>   ** Yes, these search engines are not as predictable and controlled as
> the old commercial database products. They are also products of a new
> information access paradigm. They use  software-intensive methods, not
> human-intensive judgment and expense. On the other hand, the search
> engine index surrogate is based upon the full content of source docs,
> and is NOT dependent upon a human's subjective judgment and a bizarre
> controlled vocabulary.
> 
>   ** We can quibble about Search Engine X getting 22,000 hits vs. Search
> Engine Y getting 14,000 hits. So what, do you plan on examining all of
> them? These systems operate on presentation ranking algorithms, and they
> attempt to present relevant items first.  _I'm_ certainly not going to
> look at item #4,763, and I presume you aren't going to either.
> 
>   ** Another part of the new paradigm is that the search engines are
> supported by advertising and software sales, and they are free (gasp) to
> end users. Not $nn per hour, or per hit, or $nnnn per year. Can anyone
> say that about "Dialog, BRS, STN and reliable CD ROM products"? (Or even
> newspapers, magazines, etc.) Given this shift in producer profit motive,
> which sources might you say are going to be more used by you, me, and
> the (wo)man on the street? I haven't got a spare $20 or $60 to use to
> satisfy every information need!
> 
>   ** Some of the comments seem to question, "How can we stand to use
> these shoddy products?" My own reason for using them is that they tend
> to find me the information I want, quickly and easily and cheaply.  I
> agree, they ain't perfect. I use one or another, depending upon my whim,
> or which link is closer at hand. I am most comfortable and expert with
> Alta Vista. But, if I want to do an "exhaustive" scan, I use one of the
> "agent" tools, which searches multiple search engines, and tries to give
> you a synthesis of the resulting information retrieval sets.
> 
> Finally, I attach below text taken from a recent message from John
> Creech, passed along to me by a colleague who I believe found it on
> another list.  It's really more on the topic of the "new model" of
> library information. But it also applies very much to this
> "inconsistencies" discussion that's been raging of late.
> 
> Cheers,
> -ernest
> 
> Ernest Perez, Ph.D.//Oregon State Library//perez at opac.osl.state.or.us
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
> 
> 
> 
> > ... People don't want "all the
> > information that exists in the library."  Perennial patron behavior + free
> > choice = I want 1 book, 2 journal articles, 1 magazine and I want to get
> > the hell out of here.
> > 
> > I came here recently from 2 years at Cal. State U., Monterey Bay, where we
> > were charged by Chancellor to stand this old educational paradigm on its
> > head.  We were ordered to deliver information electronically whenever
> > possible, and only to supplement with paper.  The intention from the
> > get-go was for students to retrieve full text from anywhere, to search
> > full text databases, to search cite and abs. databases, copy and paste the
> > citation into an electronic doc. delivery form, and send via Web page to
> > library ILL.  Patron might have to come into lib. only to pick up
> > photocopies and books to check out.
> > 
> > While we have much larger print collections here, we're moving (albeit
> > more slowly) in similar directions.  It is not my job to make miniature
> > librarians out of students who come in. If they want to learn more about
> > conducting comprehensive research, I'm here, willing...yea even eager,
> > to help. That's a key part of my job.
> > 
> > But I do not believe for a minute that I'm not doing my job if I don't
> > show them everything that's in the library - bibliographies, NUC, Lib. of
> > Am. Civilization, etc.
> > 
> > John Creech
> > Electronic Resources Librarian & Asst. Head of Reference | Central
> Washington
> > University Library | 400 E. 8th Ave. | Ellensburg, WA 98926 | 509-963-1081 |
> > jcreech at mumbly.lib.cwu.edu |
>