As Billinghurst was kind enough to point out, I got that the wrong way
round. Serves me right for replying to emails at 6am!

The weekly effect is definitely seasonal, which supports the idea that
it's not artificial; as to what causes it, either (1) humans are
fallible and "regular" automata is less-so (irregular automata, who
knows?) or (2) as Nemo suggests, people are searching for different
things, which would be fascinating to analyse if we could :/

On 5 January 2016 at 06:04, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
> The other way around, I think; only bots work Sundays. We know a lot
> of the search queries that don't work /shouldn't/ work: they're
> producing no results because they're nonsense, or spam, or someone
> being silly through the API. Normal human traffic rises on a Monday to
> peak on a Tuesday, and begins to drop down again towards the end of
> the week and weekend. What this means is that the proportion of
> traffic coming from non-humans is greater on the weekends (because
> fewer people are browsing) and that increases the impact of automata
> on the zero results rate for those days.
>
> On 4 January 2016 at 23:28, billinghurst <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What is with issue that we have a weekly cycle (exactly?) where there is a
>> 4% difference in the success in half a week, EVERY WEEK!
>>
>> With the number of searches done on the site, that seems like an aberration
>> that a each Sunday is a more accurate search day!?!  Analytical gremlins of
>> data capture, or not even bots work Sundays?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:54 Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> (Links: the dashboards live at http://discovery.wmflabs.org/ and an
>>> example of automata filtering can be seen at
>>> http://discovery.wmflabs.org/metrics/#failure_rate !)
>>>
>>> That is, 2% and 5% lower? You're looking at percentages so where the
>>> lines vary between checkbox options it'll be different proportions.
>>> Unless there's a graph I'm missing :D
>>>
>>> On 4 January 2016 at 13:45, Trey Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > This is awesome. Roughly, by eye, it looks like automata are about 2% of
>>> > ZRR
>>> > overall and 5% of ZRR for fulltext search, which was around 15% before
>>> > the
>>> > holidays (and lower over the holidays—during The Time of Unreliable User
>>> > Behavior).
>>> >
>>> > Is there a write up for this project? I know it had to be a ton of work,
>>> > and
>>> > I'm curious about the details (possibly more so than most).
>>> >
>>> > Do you think you got most of them? Or was the result high-precision but
>>> > not
>>> > exhaustive?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for working on this!
>>> >
>>> > —Trey
>>> >
>>> > Trey Jones
>>> > Software Engineer, Discovery
>>> > Wikimedia Foundation
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Hey all,
>>> >>
>>> >> After several weeks of work to switch all the scripts over and
>>> >> backfill, all the Discovery dashboards now have the ability to filter
>>> >> crawlers and automated software out from graphs where that is
>>> >> relevant. You should notice a simple checkbox on, for example, the
>>> >> Zero Results Rate data or Wikidata Query Service traffic.
>>> >>
>>> >> While a bit of backfilling is still waiting on the servers syncing up,
>>> >> this work is essentially complete, and provides another way to look at
>>> >> data on how people are using search (and who those people are). It was
>>> >> a heck of a lot of work, by both myself and Mikhail, but it's
>>> >> hopefully valuable :).
>>> >>
>>> >> For Discovery Analytics,
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Oliver Keyes
>>> >> Count Logula
>>> >> Wikimedia Foundation
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> discovery mailing list
>>> >> [email protected]
>>> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > discovery mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Oliver Keyes
>>> Count Logula
>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discovery mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discovery mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Oliver Keyes
> Count Logula
> Wikimedia Foundation



-- 
Oliver Keyes
Count Logula
Wikimedia Foundation

_______________________________________________
discovery mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery

Reply via email to