This is unlikely to ever happen. We have instead provided the data to do
this yourself at some reasonable sensitivity.

-John


On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:27 AM, hydrodog <dov.kru...@gmail.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> The reason for viewing an aggregate count rather than individual
> methods is to have a much more sensitive way of detecting a new
> topic.  Sampling will only give us a good representative sample above
> the threshhold, once it's already quite popular.  We'd like to be able
> to follow a topic from the start, even if it never makes it big, based
> on other criteria.
>
> Rather than a trends feed, I suggest a statistics feed would be more
> general. Consider something like:
>
> http://search.twitter.com/stats/daily.json?target="foo bar xj17"
>
> which would give back the daily statistics on the frequency of each
> token.  Then, we could follow up on individual ones of interest with a
> bigram request.  With an api based on post, we could possibly send a
> large number of such requests in one batch.
>
> http://search.twitter.com/stats/bigram.json?target="foo bar xj17"
>
> (search for all messages containing any two of the listed targets)
>
> I don't know how you organize your data, but obviously, since you
> allow search by token, you have the infrastructure to make this easy
> to do.
>

Reply via email to