There’s been a whole lot of hypothesis of what Navboost is however to my data no person has pinpointed an satisfactory patent that could possibly be the unique Navboost patent. This patent from 2004 carefully aligns with Navboost
So I took the few clues we’ve about it and recognized a pair doubtless patents.
The clues I used to be working with are that Google Software program Engineer Amit Singhal was concerned with Navboost and had a hand in inventing it. One other clue is that Navboost dated to 2005. Lastly, the courtroom paperwork point out that Navboost was up to date in a while so there could also be different patents in there about that, which we’ll get to sooner or later however not on this article.
So I deduced that if Amit Singhal was the inventor then there could be a patent along with his title on it and certainly there’s, relationship from 2004.
Out of all of the patents I noticed, the 2 most attention-grabbing had been these:
- Techniques and strategies for correlating doc topicality and recognition 2004 (patent webpage)
- Interleaving Search Outcomes 2007
This text will cope with the primary patent listed above.
Does Navboost Date From 2005?
The trial testimony signifies that Navboost dates from about 2005. On day 24 of the trial (PDF), Googler P. Pandurang Nayak testified:
Q. So remind me, is Navboost all the way in which again to 2005?
A. It’s someplace in that vary. It’d even be earlier than that.
The 2005 date is an efficient match for the patent, Techniques and strategies for correlating doc topicality and recognition, which was filed in 2004. The date of the patent is smart.
However Patent Does Not Point out Clicks?
An attention-grabbing high quality of this patent is that it doesn’t explicitly point out clicks and I believe that folks in search of the Navboost patent might have ignored this patent as a result of it doesn’t point out clicks. What the patent does talk about is are ideas associated to consumer interactions and navigational patterns which themselves are references to clicks.
You’ll be able to’t have consumer interactions or navigational patterns until a consumer is clicking on one thing within the search outcomes.
Cases The place Person Clicks Are Implied In The Patent
Doc Choice and Retrieval:
The patent describes a course of the place a consumer selects paperwork (which could be inferred as clicking on them) from search outcomes. These choices are used to find out the paperwork’ recognition.
Mapping Paperwork to Matters:
After paperwork are chosen by customers (which means clicks), they’re mapped to a number of subjects. This mapping is a key a part of the method, because it associates paperwork with particular areas of curiosity or topics.
Person Navigational Patterns:
The patent continuously refers to consumer navigational patterns, which embrace how customers work together with paperwork, such because the paperwork they presumably select to click on on. These patterns are used to compute recognition scores for the paperwork.
It’s clear that consumer clicks are a elementary a part of how the patent proposes to evaluate the recognition of paperwork.
By analyzing which paperwork customers select to work together with, the system can assign recognition scores to those paperwork. These scores, together with the topical relevance of the paperwork, are then used to boost the accuracy and relevance of search engine outcomes.
Navboost Assigns Relative Scores To Paperwork
Google govt Eric Lehman described within the trial that Navboost assigned scores to paperwork.
Right here is the place Lehman talks about assigning scores to paperwork primarily based on click on information, Lehman testified:
“And so I believe Navboost does form of the pure factor, which is, within the face of that form of uncertainty, you’re taking gentler measures. So that you would possibly modify the rating of a doc however extra mildly than when you had extra information.”
The above passage from the Google trial describes how a rating is relative to what number of visits the webpage will get. If a web site will get much less visits then the rating is modified “mildly” which presumes that if there are a lot of clicks to the positioning then the rating is completely different.
Here’s a quotation from the patent that reveals how the rating is relative to the variety of visits to a webpage:
“…a doc that has been visited by customers extra usually than one other doc might have the next recognition rating.”
Patent: Person Interactions Are A Measure Of Recognition
The patent US8595225 makes implicit references to “consumer clicks” within the context of figuring out the recognition of paperwork. Heck, recognition is so essential to the patent that it’s within the title of the patent: Techniques and strategies for correlating doc topicality and recognition
Person clicks, on this context, refers back to the interactions of customers with numerous paperwork, akin to net pages. These interactions are a important element in establishing the recognition scores for these paperwork.
The patent describes a way the place the recognition of a doc is inferred from consumer navigational patterns, which may solely be clicks.
I’d prefer to cease right here and point out that Matt Cutts has mentioned in a video that Recognition and PageRank are two various things. Recognition is about what customers are likely to choose and PageRank is about authority as evidenced by hyperlinks.
Matt outlined recognition:
“And so recognition in some sense is a measure of the place folks go whereas PageRank is way more a measure of popularity.”
That definition from about 2014 suits what this patent is speaking about by way of recognition being about the place folks go.
See Matt Cutts Explains How Google Separates Recognition From True Authority
Watch the YouTube Video: How does Google separate recognition from authority?
How The Patent Makes use of Recognition Scores
The patent describes a number of ways in which it makes use of recognition scores.
Assigning Recognition Scores:
The patent discusses assigning recognition scores to paperwork primarily based on consumer interactions such because the frequency of visits or navigation patterns (Line 1).
Per-Subject Recognition:
It talks about deriving per-topic recognition info by correlating the recognition information related to every doc to particular subjects (Line 5).
Recognition Scores in Rating:
The doc describes utilizing recognition scores to order paperwork amongst a number of subjects related to every doc (Line 13).
Recognition in Doc Retrieval:
Within the context of doc retrieval, the patent outlines utilizing recognition scores for rating paperwork (Line 27).
Figuring out Recognition Primarily based on Person Navigation:
The method of figuring out the recognition rating for every doc, which can contain utilizing consumer navigational patterns, can be talked about (Line 37).
These situations show the patent’s concentrate on incorporating the recognition of paperwork, as decided by consumer interplay (clicks), into the method of rating and correlating them to particular subjects.
The method outlined within the patent suggests a extra dynamic and user-responsive methodology of figuring out the relevance and significance of paperwork in search engine outcomes.
The extra this patent is analyzed, the extra it seems to be like what the trial paperwork described as Navboost.
Learn the patent right here:
Techniques and strategies for correlating doc topicality and recognition
Featured Picture by Shutterstock/Sabelskaya
