• On GameSpot: The top games of the 2000s so far?
March 8, 2009 8:42 AM PDT

Wolfram Alpha: Next major search breakthrough?

by Dan Farber
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 30 comments
(Credit: Wolfram Research)

Stephen Wolfram has a track record of scientific breakthroughs and some controversy. He received his Ph.D. in theoretical physics from Caltech in 1979 when he was 20 and has focused most of his career on probing complex systems. In 1988 he launched Mathematica, powerful computational software that has become the gold standard in its field. In 2002, Wolfram produced a 1,280-page tome, A New Kind of Science, based on a decade of exploration in cellular automata and complex systems. The book stirred up a lot of debate in scientific circles. Legendary physicist Freeman Dyson described the tome as "a case of style over substance." (See Steven Levy's Wired profile of Wolfram).

In May, Wolfram will unveil his latest creation, now called Wolfram Alpha. It applies his work with Mathematica and NKS (A New Kind of Science) to Web search. "All one needs to be able to do is to take questions people ask in natural language, and represent them in a precise form that fits into the computations one can do," Wolfram said in a recent blog post. "I'm happy to say that with a mixture of many clever algorithms and heuristics, lots of linguistic discovery and linguistic curation, and what probably amount to some serious theoretical breakthroughs, we're actually managing to make it work...It's going to be a website: www.wolframalpha.com. With one simple input field that gives access to a huge system, with trillions of pieces of curated data and millions of lines of algorithms," he added.

It follows the Google principle, with a simple input box, but takes a different approach to rendering search results. Nova Spivack, CEO of Radar Networks, which developed Twine, an ambitious "interest network" Web application based on semantic Web technologies, said that Wolfram Alpha may be as "important for the Web (and the world) as Google, but for a different purpose."

Spivack shared his initial impressions of Wolfram Alpha based on a two-hour conversation with Wolfram.

"Wolfram Alpha is like plugging into a vast electronic brain. It provides extremely impressive and thorough answers to a wide range of questions asked in many different ways, and it computes answers, it doesn't merely look them up in a big database."

"In this respect it is vastly smarter than (and different from) Google. Google simply retrieves documents based on keyword searches. Google doesn't understand the question or the answer, and doesn't compute answers based on models of various fields of human knowledge."

Spivack gave some insight as to how the Wolfram's search engine works:

Wolfram Alpha is a system for computing the answers to questions. To accomplish this it uses built-in models of fields of knowledge, complete with data and algorithms, that represent real-world knowledge.

For example, it contains formal models of much of what we know about science -- massive amounts of data about various physical laws and properties, as well as data about the physical world.

Based on this you can ask it scientific questions and it can compute the answers for you. Even if it has not been programmed explicity to answer each question you might ask it.

But science is just one of the domains it knows about--it also knows about technology, geography, weather, cooking, business, travel, people, music, and more.

It also has a natural language interface for asking it questions. This interface allows you to ask questions in plain language, or even in various forms of abbreviated notation, and then provides detailed answers.

The vision seems to be to create a system which can do for formal knowledge (all the formally definable systems, heuristics, algorithms, rules, methods, theorems, and facts in the world) what search engines have done for informal knowledge (all the text and documents in various forms of media).

Wolfram's engine isn't going to replace Google, according to Spivack, although he suggests Google would like to own it.

"You would probably not use Wolfram Alpha to shop for a new car, find blog posts about a topic, or to choose a resort for your honeymoon. It is not a system that will understand the nuances of what you consider to be the perfect romantic getaway, for example--there is still no substitute for manual human-guided search for that. Where it appears to excel is when you want facts about something, or when you need to compute a factual answer to some set of questions about factual data."

For now, we'll have to wait until May to see whether the Web and scientific worlds embrace Wolfram's Alpha as a major mathematical and engineering breakthrough.

Read Nova Spivack's "Wolfram Alpha is Coming -- and It Could be as Important as Google"

See also: VentureBeat: Wolfram Alpha -- it's like plugging into an electronic brain

Dan Farber is editor in chief of CBS Interactive News, which includes CBSNews.com and CNET News. He has more than 25 years of experience as an editor and journalist covering technology. E-mail Dan.
Recent posts from Outside the Lines
Track business executives' tweets with ExecTweets
Wolfram Alpha: Next major search breakthrough?
Microsoft's Live Mesh top innovation at the Crunchies
Macintosh at 25: Still the innovation leader
Print news is fading, but the content lives on
More speculation on Yahoo's CEO choices
Google's 2008 Zeitgeist lists of most popular searches
The information flow from Mumbai
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (30 Comments)
by carlg113 March 8, 2009 10:30 AM PDT
lol
Reply to this comment
by ddhboy March 8, 2009 10:37 AM PDT
So how long until google buys him out?
Reply to this comment
by knowles2 March 9, 2009 8:29 AM PDT
I give it a year.
by ericanew October 22, 2009 3:20 PM PDT
Microsoft already has there hands in contracts with Wolfa (for future via Bing service displaying WolframAlpha search results). If there is going to be a buyout it will be from Microsoft. I don't see Wolfram selling nevertheless
by Daniel_Tunkelang March 8, 2009 11:27 AM PDT
I wish for his own sake that he had the sense to hold off on the hype until launching it. This space is riddled with the corpses of over-hyped solutions that fail on launch, and Wolfram's reputation for hubris doesn't exactly instill confidence.
Reply to this comment
by Xhorba March 9, 2009 4:23 AM PDT
LOL what kind of suggestion is that? Don't hype until you launch because it might fail? Are there businesses on your planet?
by jtara March 8, 2009 11:52 AM PDT
I really welcome this development, and hope he can attract the kind of money to be able to index the web as deeply as Google has. Unfortunately, the latter has been the sticking point with all Google alternatives so far, no matter how good they work - they simply don't have the money to index as broadly or in as timely a fashion as Google.

Google has fought tooth-and-nail AGAINST natural language input, usually citing "unnecessary noise words!" Instead, we have the tail wagging the dog, actually changing the way we use language today. More and more, people are speaking in indecipherable keywords, instead of in real sentences and paragraphs. I believe this is a direct result of our dependence on Google, and so we have the Googlization of language. It is a sad development, and perhaps we can start to reverse the trend..
Reply to this comment
by Xhorba March 9, 2009 4:39 AM PDT
Very interesting about google and NLS! I didn't know they had taken a declarative position on the subject until I read your comment (and googled it ;) The problem with NLS is that people expect the search engine to have unreasonable levels of common sense. We need more dog wagging to train people to think of the nls engines context before it will work. Wolfram avoids this problem by giving users the context up front -- science questions.

You lost me with the whole "people talking in keywords" thing, though. I am a software developer with kids... I've seen txt msg speak, but I've never heard people verbalize google interrogatives like, "Angelina Jolie kids" or "tainted peanuts products"... What did you mean, exactly?
by damiandennison March 8, 2009 4:07 PM PDT
I guess at this point is it not how good the technology is but how much money you have to put it to use. This is a sad case because we never get to have much of choice when this happens. I think that is bad for all of us.
Reply to this comment
by flickrz March 8, 2009 4:35 PM PDT
This won't go too far. People are impatient - they won't want to wait for more than 2 seconds for results to come back. As I understand, this would require huge amount of processing and would certainly be very slow compare to standards of yahoo, google, live and other keyword based search engines.
Reply to this comment
by Super2online March 9, 2009 9:10 AM PDT
I think your confusing the purposes though. Google is a search for documents that might give you the answer after reading one to many pages/docs to confirm the outcome. This will give you precise answers. Plus you can use natural language. I don't know about you, but I would much rather wait 10-30 seconds knowing the result will provide exactly what I need, rather than the poke and hope that is the current situation with all search engines, including Google. I wish him all the luck in the world!
by jonathan0766 March 8, 2009 7:57 PM PDT
Wolfram must be looking for some capital. He knows full well that if his system is good, Google will toss a nice chunk of money at him just to remove it from the market. The Google brain trust is very aware of his mathematical capabilities. If there's an elite group of math gods out there that Brin and Page worship, Wolfram is in their company.
Reply to this comment
by 4thDDev March 10, 2009 8:57 AM PDT
Many mathematicians appreciate using Mathematica and how it handles computational abstract algebra. HOWEVER, most mathematicians in that area are aware of how Wolfram likes to take algorithms that have been around for years (or 100s of years) and imply that WR created them with their genius. I wouldn't be surprised if Alpha is based on some open source project or a Google API and renting rack space with another company. WR ego aside, they do make solid applications and are good at creating UIs for a target audience.
by rrod182 March 8, 2009 8:28 PM PDT
yawn
Reply to this comment
by March 9, 2009 2:42 AM PDT
"Google simply retrieves documents based on keyword searches. Google doesn't understand the question or the answer, and doesn't compute answers based on models of various fields of human knowledge."

Surely Mr Spivack has got it wrong. Google has an implicit model of human knowledge - links represent human judgements about semantic relationships.
Reply to this comment
by markl1984 March 9, 2009 4:33 AM PDT
I look forward to trying this. Ask google a meaningful question and it will respond with links to advertisements and blogs filled with vapid comments. Maybe with Wolfram alpha we will be able to use the internet and it's vast but diffuse bodies of information to immediately answer real questions and efficiently solve real life problems. To those who found this article a yawn - don't worry - the internet will always have ample supply of pointless games, pornography and illegal music downloads.
Reply to this comment
by envirolab March 9, 2009 8:55 AM PDT
So this is like an automated wikipedia that generates its own answers. Cool, now we get unauthoritative answers from a system with potentially no context behind why the specific answer was given. How is this any better than a magic eight ball?
Reply to this comment
by scottthesculptor March 9, 2009 11:46 AM PDT
As time goes by and the internet gets ever dumber it's harder to sort the useful information that you are searching for from the ever growing pile of useless information.

There really does need to be a better way to get a useful answer.
Hope this one helps.

remember gopher?
worked well when most people on the 'net were computer science professionals.
Didn't need an AltaVista or a Google until the brainless masses found the net through AOL and the WWW.

The valid_info to noise ratio is ever widening.
Just coming up with an answer by analyzing the question instead of searching for one seems like a good idea to me.
Reply to this comment
by summershoe March 9, 2009 1:10 PM PDT
Sounds very high minded but I hope it works as advertised. When the web really got rolling in the 90's I had hopes it would heighten democracy by letting anyone easily know the facts. But it quickly became clogged with so much propaganda you can google your heart out and still believe Al Gore claimed to invent the internet and Donald Rumsfeld was the first to utter his "known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns" quote. Maybe this search engine will sift through the hype better?
Reply to this comment
by bbneo2 March 9, 2009 1:56 PM PDT
Skynet!!!! Run for your lives!!!!
Reply to this comment
by Palmetto_72 March 9, 2009 3:46 PM PDT
In any event, I will finally be able to ask the question, "42? What the hell kind of answer is that!"
Reply to this comment
by gmhendo March 9, 2009 3:50 PM PDT
A really interesting development huh? i was taken by the comments that implied or looked at the social effects of the system. On reflection it is easy to see how internet search has changed learning, you can now attend univerity or college from your home, just as an example.
So what are the medium/long term possibilities? How will it affect the way people start to think? Is it another brick in the wall of artificial intelligence? Are these thingds good?

It's an interesting world
Reply to this comment
by March 9, 2009 6:41 PM PDT
If this works--and it's a really big IF--this is the next big thing. Hard to say without knowing what he's really thinking--is it real, or is it PowerPoint. (Oh, wait--bad example. PowerPoint is the one Office tool without XML. D'oh!)

But this could be really amazing. If I were a VC, I'd be on the phone.
Reply to this comment
by sent2null March 10, 2009 12:16 AM PDT
www.trueknowledge.com already does this today folks, and have been doing it for a year now. Here is the problem that wolframalpha will face. Accuracy costs learning time for the semantics of a natural language question. meaning must be given to each word in a statement and related, that can happen through automated feeding of definitions (which takes time and effort on the engineering side) or more cheaply by letting the user space do it (exactly what google did with their statistical search algo.) semantic search sites like trueknowledge.com require lots of learning to be able to answer complex natural language questions. However, it has had a head start over wolfram alpha, check it out and join the beta to see the results, some I just received:

I just asked it a question "what is 4 x 5?" and it answered straight away "20" but it choked on "what is 3 plus 9 x 2" but only because it lacks the semantic equivalence of "plus" to the "+" which I can provide (but it is a pain to do so)

I asked trueknowledge another question just now "where was barak obama born?" and the result, "honolulu, hawaii" straight away. More impressive "What is the closest planet to Earth?" , return "Venus". It has gotten smarter since the last time I used it a few months ago, I signed up for the private beta over a year ago and it couldn't answer the "planet" question then. Note how that question requires the system to know what "closest" means in the context of this sentence! very impressive. I switched the question to "what planet is closest to Earth?" and again "Venus" and then finally I asked "Is Venus bigger than Mars?" to which it returned "I don't know" at which point after telling it the answer was "yes" It was then able to answer the question correctly as "yes". Again the learning process (which spanned several pages) is the hump that these systems must get over to become really efficient. TN has been in beta for over a year! I will be interested to see how Wolfram's service compares in its initial beta.
Reply to this comment
by Manskj March 18, 2009 3:30 PM PDT
We often think of math something we have invented to explain the universe based on emperical evidence but in fact if you drop enough matches on a table you will find the number Pi which leads to the calculated answer of a circle. This intersection between math and cellular automata in this way leads to an answer to the circumference of the earth. So by putting a natural language processor on top and grabbing the implied context(s) and deviations you could skip the math part and vary the bottom layer algorithms of the physical universe to calculate the answer. In other words somebody asks for the distance of flight from Madrid to Sydney and instead of calculating the arc via mathemtical formula you start dropping sticks or some reduced mini celluar automata.
Lets say you want to know how strong the TV signal is in a valley. First you figure out the domain which in this case is radio waves and transmission. Youget the relevant input like radio tower locations and terrain but then you dont use Maxwells Equations you use the fact that space is 3 dimensional and that something must spread from here to there. You include the terrain in the model and calculate and calculate and drop lower order terms.

So we can think of the stack the normal way we deal with stuff as:
1)Ideas
2)Language
3)Physics and Empirically Observed Results (Theory)
4)Math
5)Cellular Automata of the Universe
Wolfram Alfa seems to cutout the middle and deal with it this way:
1)Ideas
2)Language
3)Cellular Automata of the Universe

I've summarized some of this at: <a href="http://isontech.blogspot.com/2009/03/wolfram-alfa-search-engine.html"> http://isontech.blogspot.com/2009/03/wolfram-alfa-search-engine.html</a>
Reply to this comment
by gabrielweinberg March 21, 2009 9:57 AM PDT
Hey, also be sure to check out our new search engine, Duck Duck Go: http://www.duckduckgo.com/. We also have some semantic properties, e.g. ambigious keyword detection: http://www.duckduckgo.com/?q=apple, as well as have zero-click info, e.g. http://duckduckgo.com/?q=Futurama.

Take care,

Gabriel Weinberg
Founder & CEO, Duck Duck Go
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (30 Comments)

S.F. hacker space: Heaven for the DIY set?

The Noisebridge hacker space offers sewing and Mandarin classes, soldering workshops, Internet-controlled front door access, and a server room with no door.
• Photos: Circuits, code, community

The browser battles go on and on

roundup From Firefox to IE and from Chrome to Opera and Safari, there's no sitting still for browser makers looking to keep their products fresh and competitive.

About Outside the Lines

Dan Farber is the editor in chief of CNET News. He has covered technology for more than two decades, and he previously served as editor in chief of ZDNet, PC Week and MacWeek. Outside the Lines explores the intersection of business and technology.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Outside the Lines topics

Subscribe to the EIC² podcast

Editors Dan Farber of News.com and Larry Dignan of ZDNet, square off in EIC² in this weekly podcast. The two editor in chiefs talk about the big tech stories of the day and provide insight and analysis.

Subscribe to this podcast using an RSS reader other than iTunes

Subscribe to this podcast using iTunes

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right