On 14 September 2012 12:47, Tim Green <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah, in practice google scholar hasn't actually been helpful. How about
> just generate a simple Google search?
>

I am aware that Google Scholar has been running into some problems the
last year or so.    The web crawler looks for things on the web that
look like peer reviewed scholarly articles (have a title, a list of
authors, an abstract, references/biblography &c) for potential
inclusion.  Apparently certain groups trying to push ideas not
generally accepted by academe have been flooding the web with articles
in that format which essentially cover the same material each time but
just reword some parts, change the title, different authors &c in an
attempt to drown out the peer reviewed material.  Google have been
finding ways to detect this but obviously there are some false
positives and it has distracted from other improvements (and whilst
crawling the un-peer reviewed stuff the crawler isn't crawling the
proper material).

This might also go someway to explining why Google Scholar didn't find
the blog entry, it didn't look like a peer reviewed article according
to the given criteria.

Stephen


-- 
It's better to ask a silly question than to make a silly assumption.

http://stephensorablog.blogspot.com/ |
http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenboothuk | Skype: stephenbooth_uk

PRINCE2 (2009) Practitioner and CHAMPS2 (2010) Practitioner

.

_______________________________________________
developers-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public

Unsubscribe: 
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to