Sir
It is disturbing that no single search engine indexes more than a meagre 16 per cent of the web, down from about 33 per cent 18 months ago ( Nature 400, 107–109; 1999). Users' ability to look at documents has remained static, so people still only look at the first few tens of search results.
Most mainstream search engines rely on relevance-score algorithms to rank matches. Such algorithms are prone to manipulation by content providers, who can rig their content to yield a spuriously high relevance score. But transparent algorithms are necessary for users to understand how to get the most from search engines. The end result is a long list of hits of doubtful relevance, quality and completeness.
This makes topic-specific search engines — which aim to cover the majority of content within a specific topic, rather than a small fraction of every topic — all the more appealing. Such an approach also allows content to be reviewed and structured so that users are presented with an intelligently categorized, hierarchical list of matches, rather than a linear one. This allows rapid identification (‘drilling down’) of the most relevant matches.
One example that addresses these issues is OrthoSearch (http://www.orthosearch.com ), covering orthopaedics and related topics. OrthoSearch uses the Internet Society of Orthopaedic Surgery's web-links policy to determine which sites are relevant, avoiding many shortcomings of the most popular search engines.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chiu, A., Sherry, E. & Phung, X. … just try to be specific …. Nature 401, 111 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/43543
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/43543