News

FactBites : The Results in Meaningful Sentences

Evolving algorithms, AI and computational linguistics, those are the credentials of Rapid Intelligence, the firm that provides us the search tool FactBites.

The search engine provides meaningful summaries for all the results of the search queries. These are not just sentence level matches but appear to be a result of contextual analysis too as visible in the contextually correct results.

Here’s a quote from Pandia.com

On their web site, Rapid Intelligence calls Factbites a search engine/encyclopedia hybrid. Unlike a regular search engine, the search results are presented as a summary of each web page, which you can read from beginning to end.

So what are the reasons to use FactBites ?

The User interface is clear and neat. The results are meaningful sentences and if you do a search on topics where you are looking for answers on topics you have no clue on, the engine provides good summaries so as to not having to leave the search page itself. From the website announcements, it seems that the engine sports a more updated database now.

Rapid Intelligence, the firm behind FactBites has also launched into other vertical search engine such as CompWisdom to search on Computer programming and internet and Financial Records that focuses business and finance. There’s a certain trend that is discernible in the search ventures of today, one is the rise of more vertical search engines. It might also bore well for engines to start out into niche domains and grow out into more generalized engines. Might just be the next wave to take upon the likes of Google and Yahoo. How do you feel the facts measure up for FactBite?

You Might Also Like

Comments are closed.

6 thoughts on “FactBites : The Results in Meaningful Sentences

  1. The results could be better, but I find the intralinking between SERP descriptions and occurences to other search results to be an interesting and wikipedia-esque form of relevant search suggestion & navigation (and could be quite effective in having their search results indexed by other engines).

    For example :

    http://www.factbites.com/topics/Owen-Wilson

    Overlook the lack of current news stories and we have links within the results on this page to other very relevant topics on the actor’s life, family, works and home state.

  2. Just adding a little to what Loren said, the salient point being that the engine produces facts for a query, like more of an encyclopedia backing a search engine. Hence mentioning an object ( in this case Owen Wilson) in a context (such as…well…. suicide) could fetch the facts.

  3. If these guys do manage to get their search engine to walk the talk, my money is on them being caught in the middle of a feeding frenzy.

    Right now, Microsoft are looking for an edge, and I can’t see Google just letting them gain that by buying up a new player with a good idea…

  4. With a number of new engines coming out, with the hope of emerging as the next big player in the search domain, there is the speculation that the real successful may eventual get bought up by the big-shots. But I have often pondered on why the search giants would make such a move?

    It can’t be for data, which is what makes the search engines the GIANTs in this space.

    As far as nifty algorithms go, there is always the point that the whole architecture used by a search engine is unique for its data-set, hardware and software. Implying that the engines are probably better off trying to figure out incorporating the techniques in their own systems rather than integrating it with other systems.