Advocate's Studio

Musings on Technology in the Law, Research and Writing

Main menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • About The Advocate
  • The Advocate's Disclaimer

Tag Archives: metadata

Post navigation

Apr 7 2011

Make Meaning of Twitter With Bottlenose

I cannot wait for this tool to hit the public! As Studio readers know, I love relevance, personalization and curation of the vast information available on the Web. This is because I have a burning desire to be able to put my finger immediately on whatever I might be looking for and get information delivered to me that I want, even before I know that I want it. Right now, my main tools for that are my6sense (Google Reader and social streams) and Feedly (Google Reader).

While I feel like I have a serviceable handle on the information flow, Twitter still eludes me somewhat. The my6sense Chrome extension helps dramatically when I am on the Web on my computer. But apart from filtering by age of tweet, there is not a great deal of granularity or customization, apart from what happens behind the scenes when I interact with the information it serves up.

Coming soon to a Twitter near you is a very cool app called Bottlenose. It will be released in closed beta in about a month and then introduced to the public at some time thereafter. Bottlenose is aimed directly at Twitter with the goal of highlighting for you the information you deem most important. The app works both behind the scenes and with your voluntarily categorized descriptive data (you can tag your tweets with topics when you make them). The app assigns a score to tweets based on a variety of factors (i.e. Klout scores, relevance, etc.) and does its own tagging of tweets with metadata categories. On this basis, you can filter the information you are receiving by narrowing in on the category you are looking for and determine the weight you should give a particular tweet based on its score.  Additionally, the app reads your own tweet history to get a sense of what you are interested in and will offer back relevant information in line with those interests. All in real-time.

Current iteration of the app is web only, but the fine folks at Bottleneck are looking to expand to mobile applications, generally upping the anticipated quality of my checkout line reading accordingly.

I cannot wait. I already have my invite request in – you can too here.

Hat tip to MG Siegler over at Techcrunch.

Advertisement

Share this:

  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...
By Martha Sperry • Posted in Uncategorized • Tagged app, bottlenose, metadata, relevance, tool, tweets, Twitter, web
1
Aug 24 2010

Search Tools and Concept Searching

“Search” is familiar territory for lawyers – the term impliedly describes computer-aided discovery, evolved  from the longer, two-syllable term “research”, which, of course, includes old school book-based methods. But search itself is an evolving concept. We are far from the days of early Boolean search on a Walt II terminal. Furthermore, electronic search for lawyers now must adress the needs of both the legal researcher and the e-discovery expert.

I stumbled across an article today at Law.com’s Law Technology News entitled “What Lawyers Need To Know About Search Tools.” The article is written byMark Grossman and Terry Sweeney. Glancing only at the title, I thought it might be a *yawn* list of free on-line legal resources or *yawn* 1L explanation of how to form a search query. Not so. Written from the e-discovery perspective with the apparent intent of helping lawyers properly respond to discovery requests and comply with the Rules of Civil Procedure, the article is a decent critique of keyword searching as an effective means of information retrieval, particularly over vast stores of e-documents.  

By far, the best part of the article is the section entitled A VARIETY OF MODELS, which discusses variations on the theme of concept searching. The authors explain how taxonomies and ontologies (oooh, semantic!) can power-up search systems, retrieving far more relevant results than simple keyword search, particularly if beefed up with mathematical or statistical algorithms and/or combined with metadata. The authors concede the keyword and Boolean searching is still useful for small and rolling data sets. Nonetheless, it is clear that new search models are pushing our ability to quickly find and categorize information and changing the very definition of what constitutes a “reasonable” search.

The authors conclude that perfection is not the goal and reasonableness is, well, reasonable in e-discovery. My take away is a little different – the better our machine language / learning systems, tighter the algorithms and more consistent and deep the metadata, the closer we will get to perfection in search results. I, for one, can’t wait.

Share this:

  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...
By Martha Sperry • Posted in Uncategorized • Tagged concept, eDiscovery, metadata, research, Search, semantic
0

Post navigation

BLAWG_100_HonoreeBadgeRed
Solo Practice University Faculty

Subscribe To This Blog

Subscribe To My Podcast

Subscribe to this podcast feed

Twitter Timeline

Tweets by advocatesstudio
May 2023
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Sep    

Archives

  • September 2019
  • February 2019
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • August 2015
  • May 2015
  • June 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • April 2008

Blog Stats

  • 180,028 hits
Follow this blog
Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Advocate's Studio
    • Join 48 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Advocate's Studio
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: