Comments on: Latent Semantic Imaging (LSI)..3 years later http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html I think there's an opinion on that subject lying around here somewhere.... Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:45:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: DigitalGhost http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-173 Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:26:57 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-173 >>but Google is not yet doing LSA as much as it is doing “something with LSA”. That's my current understanding as well. It's my belief that Google, and other engines, will continue to integrate various aspects of LSA into their algorithms. To what extent? Only their engineers will ever know. The study of LSA is just one step that I feel is needed to anticipate how engines will operate in the future. I may be completely wrong in my anticipation, but the current condition suggests that LSA is a useful tool for concept matching. I would like to think, but I'm not sure, that LSA algorithms (when the technology improves and implementation is more thorough) will be more difficult to manipulate. Not because the technology raises the learning curve, but simply because manipulating (future) LSA algorithms will require more work. >>My bets are on SEO. As are mine. >>but Google is not yet doing LSA as much as it is doing “something with LSA”.

That’s my current understanding as well. It’s my belief that Google, and other engines, will continue to integrate various aspects of LSA into their algorithms. To what extent? Only their engineers will ever know. The study of LSA is just one step that I feel is needed to anticipate how engines will operate in the future.

I may be completely wrong in my anticipation, but the current condition suggests that LSA is a useful tool for concept matching. I would like to think, but I’m not sure, that LSA algorithms (when the technology improves and implementation is more thorough) will be more difficult to manipulate. Not because the technology raises the learning curve, but simply because manipulating (future) LSA algorithms will require more work.

>>My bets are on SEO.

As are mine.

]]> by: John Andrews http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-172 Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:03:03 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-172 David: Thanks. Peter: Just becase I called it Latent Semantic Imaging doesn't mean that's a new buzzword. I am not a linguistics researcher by any stretch. I tend to get visual when describing things to clients and the idea here is that the words on the page (via their impact of whatever part of LSA is being used, plus more) can cause Google to assign a new definition (perhaps not any of those words) for that page. So furball, hack, scratch, and meow on the page may influence Google to send you traffic for the query "cat" even though you never had the word "cat" on your page. I called it a "latent image of a cat" in Google's eyes. See DG's comment for why this is nothing new. DG: I totally agree with you and I think I said that above. Those discussions (and especially the links to references on your old blog, thanks) got me to look at LSA back then. I started ranking for terms not on the page (the latent content) and did so with no backlinks. As the SEO world went into the "links are everything" mode 3 years ago, I was seeing 20k uniques on small sites that had almost zero backlinks. As for all the work, you are a linguistic researcher (right?) and so those are your tools. LSA (the field) is your arena, but Google is not yet doing LSA as much as it is doing "something with LSA". Are your tools required to address what Google is doing with LSA? I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure that while eventually Google will do more LSA (and LSA research will evolve to support SEs better), in the mean time SEO is all about competition. So unless you or some other talented linguistics person is working LSA magic in my niche, I don't need to do the work you reference. I need to do only what matters. Of course I recognize the asymptotic projection of that path towards increased effectiveness of LSA, but I also recognize the infinite power of disruptive technology and market competition. My bets are on SEO. David: Thanks.
Peter: Just becase I called it Latent Semantic Imaging doesn’t mean that’s a new buzzword. I am not a linguistics researcher by any stretch. I tend to get visual when describing things to clients and the idea here is that the words on the page (via their impact of whatever part of LSA is being used, plus more) can cause Google to assign a new definition (perhaps not any of those words) for that page. So furball, hack, scratch, and meow on the page may influence Google to send you traffic for the query “cat” even though you never had the word “cat” on your page. I called it a “latent image of a cat” in Google’s eyes. See DG’s comment for why this is nothing new.

DG: I totally agree with you and I think I said that above. Those discussions (and especially the links to references on your old blog, thanks) got me to look at LSA back then. I started ranking for terms not on the page (the latent content) and did so with no backlinks. As the SEO world went into the “links are everything” mode 3 years ago, I was seeing 20k uniques on small sites that had almost zero backlinks.

As for all the work, you are a linguistic researcher (right?) and so those are your tools. LSA (the field) is your arena, but Google is not yet doing LSA as much as it is doing “something with LSA”. Are your tools required to address what Google is doing with LSA? I’m not sure. I’m pretty sure that while eventually Google will do more LSA (and LSA research will evolve to support SEs better), in the mean time SEO is all about competition. So unless you or some other talented linguistics person is working LSA magic in my niche, I don’t need to do the work you reference. I need to do only what matters.

Of course I recognize the asymptotic projection of that path towards increased effectiveness of LSA, but I also recognize the infinite power of disruptive technology and market competition. My bets are on SEO.

]]> by: DigitalGhost http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-171 Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:25:36 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-171 The cat may very well be out of the bag, and the concept isn't new. C'mon, why did Google buy Applied Semantics? I've been working with LSA for years, wrote about it 4 years ago, had discussions about it in many fora years ago, but most SEOs dismissed LSA as being too resource intensive for the engines to use. So, no one cared. And now, very few people care to listen, and some still refuse to believe that it has or ever will be used. Has Google 'turned the knobs" Or are they just getting better at implementing LSA? Who cares? What matters is that understanding LSA takes work and most people don't want to work. They want easy solutions. This particular feline jumped out of the sack many years ago, has been discussed for years but simply didn't get any attention, and likely still won't. 'N-grams, word dependencies, concordances, Markov chains, etc, makes people's eyes glaze over. The cat may very well be out of the bag, and the concept isn’t new. C’mon, why did Google buy Applied Semantics? I’ve been working with LSA for years, wrote about it 4 years ago, had discussions about it in many fora years ago, but most SEOs dismissed LSA as being too resource intensive for the engines to use. So, no one cared. And now, very few people care to listen, and some still refuse to believe that it has or ever will be used.

Has Google ‘turned the knobs” Or are they just getting better at implementing LSA? Who cares? What matters is that understanding LSA takes work and most people don’t want to work. They want easy solutions.

This particular feline jumped out of the sack many years ago, has been discussed for years but simply didn’t get any attention, and likely still won’t. ‘N-grams, word dependencies, concordances, Markov chains, etc, makes people’s eyes glaze over.

]]> by: Peter http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-170 Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:07:22 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-170 I always thought that LSI was an acronym for Latent Semantic Indexing . . . I think LSA has been around since the early 90's in relation to natural language studies and was adopted by the SE's for obvious reasons. I always thought that LSI was an acronym for Latent Semantic Indexing . . .
I think LSA has been around since the early 90’s in relation to natural language studies and was adopted by the SE’s for obvious reasons.

]]> by: David Harry http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-166 Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:10:09 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/103/latent-semantic-imaging-lsi.html#comment-166 Great stuff.... I am going to put a resource link to this page in an article I have on LSA/I on my site. Great stuff and keep up the great work. theGypsy (WMW,SEW) Great stuff…. I am going to put a resource link to this page in an article I have on LSA/I on my site.

Great stuff and keep up the great work.

theGypsy (WMW,SEW)

]]>