|
On search context- very good point. We're putting together a couple graphical summaries to try for profiles, as well as exposing keywords on search results soon. I think you're absolutely right about result trustworthiness and backing up why something is relevant in a meaningful way. I'd love to include results from philosophy and related fields, but we just don't have data sources for them yet. Right now, I think we need to do a better job hammering in that the data we've indexed is in the computer and information science arena. We don't have the resources of all the other players in the field, so I think a niche strategy is important. Are there any particularly great repositories for bibliographic or full-text data in philosophy? On Judea Pearl- you're right, we messed up! Do consider, though, that he's claimed his Google Scholar Citations profile. We've done all of our profile inference automatically. Sometimes that leads to a bunch of author pages that need to be merged, like in Pearl's case- we have all his papers, but didn't know they were written by the same real-world person, so they're fragmented (http://scholr.ly/results/?q=judea+pearl&x=0&y=0&...). Other times, we have more complete profiles than Google, because many academics don't claim their Google Scholar Citations profiles. It's an ongoing concern, so we'll be spending a bunch of time on this problem (called entity disambiguation in the lit) as well as upgrading venues, publishers, etc to clickable first-class citizens before our next major release. Thanks so much for your feedback- hopefully I'll be able to post again soon with improvements. |