There’s been plenty of hypothesis of what Navboost is however to my data no one has pinpointed an ample patent that might be the unique Navboost patent. This patent from 2004 carefully aligns with Navboost
So I took the few clues we’ve got 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 court docket paperwork point out that Navboost was up to date afterward so there could also be different patents in there about that, which we’ll get to in some unspecified time in the future 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, courting from 2004.
Out of all of the patents I noticed, the 2 most attention-grabbing had been these:
- Programs and strategies for correlating doc topicality and recognition 2004 (patent webpage)
- Interleaving Search Outcomes 2007
This text will take care of 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 effective match for the patent, Programs 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 on the lookout for 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 person interactions and navigational patterns which themselves are references to clicks.
You may’t have person interactions or navigational patterns except a person 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 person selects paperwork (which could be inferred as clicking on them) from search outcomes. These picks are used to find out the paperwork’ reputation.
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 steadily refers to person 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 reputation scores for the paperwork.
It’s clear that person clicks are a basic 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 reputation 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 government 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 type of the pure factor, which is, within the face of that type of uncertainty, you are taking gentler measures. So that you would possibly modify the rating of a doc however extra mildly than in case 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 website will get much less visits then the rating is modified “mildly” which presumes that if there are various clicks to the location then the rating is totally different.
Here’s a quotation from the patent that exhibits how the rating is relative to the variety of visits to a webpage:
“…a doc that has been visited by customers extra typically than one other doc might have a better reputation rating.”
Patent: Person Interactions Are A Measure Of Reputation
The patent US8595225 makes implicit references to “person clicks” within the context of figuring out the recognition of paperwork. Heck, reputation is so necessary to the patent that it’s within the title of the patent: Programs and strategies for correlating doc topicality and recognition
Person clicks, on this context, refers back to the interactions of customers with numerous paperwork, similar to net pages. These interactions are a important part in establishing the recognition scores for these paperwork.
The patent describes a technique the place the recognition of a doc is inferred from person navigational patterns, which may solely be clicks.
I’d wish to cease right here and point out that Matt Cutts has mentioned in a video that Reputation and PageRank are two various things. Reputation is about what customers are inclined to favor and PageRank is about authority as evidenced by hyperlinks.
Matt outlined reputation:
“And so reputation in some sense is a measure of the place folks go whereas PageRank is way more a measure of fame.”
That definition from about 2014 matches what this patent is speaking about by way of reputation being about the place folks go.
See Matt Cutts Explains How Google Separates Reputation From True Authority
Watch the YouTube Video: How does Google separate reputation from authority?
How The Patent Makes use of Reputation Scores
The patent describes a number of ways in which it makes use of reputation scores.
Assigning Reputation Scores:
The patent discusses assigning reputation scores to paperwork primarily based on person interactions such because the frequency of visits or navigation patterns (Line 1).
Per-Subject Reputation:
It talks about deriving per-topic reputation data by correlating the recognition information related to every doc to particular subjects (Line 5).
Reputation Scores in Rating:
The doc describes utilizing reputation scores to order paperwork amongst a number of subjects related to every doc (Line 13).
Reputation in Doc Retrieval:
Within the context of doc retrieval, the patent outlines utilizing reputation scores for rating paperwork (Line 27).
Figuring out Reputation Based mostly on Person Navigation:
The method of figuring out the recognition rating for every doc, which can contain utilizing person navigational patterns, can also be talked about (Line 37).
These situations display the patent’s deal with incorporating the recognition of paperwork, as decided by person 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 technique of figuring out the relevance and significance of paperwork in search engine outcomes.
The extra this patent is analyzed, the extra it appears like what the trial paperwork described as Navboost.
Learn the patent right here:
Programs and strategies for correlating doc topicality and recognition
Featured Picture by Shutterstock/Sabelskaya