Comments for Not Relevant

So why does this work? It’s simple enough. It looks at successive sequences of four bytes (not even characters for Unicode), hashes them into about a million buckets, and computes some simple s...

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/efficient-and-effective-spam-filtering-and-re-ranking-for-large-web-datasets/#comment-2024

Enjoyed your paper. I'm amazed that such a simple approach works. In your code in "http://arxiv.org/pdf/1004.5168v1.pdf" h = b % should read h = b % P; in both places. John Nagle

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/efficient-and-effective-spam-filtering-and-re-ranking-for-large-web-datasets/#comment-2021

I picked the two that were more interesting to me!

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/2010/10/26/vote-for-the-best-cikm-2010-papers/#comment-216

Some good ideas/suggestions: http://www.the-scientist.com/2010/8/1/36/1/#ixzz0w7Bl1duO

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/editorial-guidelines/#comment-119

wrote about the unending cycle of complaining that the IR community has spiraled into. “Not Relevant” was born in the wake of all this discussion to give SIGIR rejects an alternative venue t...

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/2010/03/25/welcome-to-not-relevant/#comment-108

week, we published our first submission dealing with detecting spam in blog datasets (the removal of which improves search results considerably).The paper is accompanied by commentary

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/efficient-and-effective-spam-filtering-and-re-ranking-for-large-web-datasets/#comment-81

rest of the details are covered in the editorial guidelines, but the gist is  that authors submit their manuscripts to the site, the board decides if there is

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/editorial-guidelines/#comment-80

Nick, you should follow the right people on Twitter! Not Relevant (But Useful!) was all over the Twittersphere a few weeks ago. I am happy to help with the HCIR side of things; maybe we can recru...

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/editorial-board/#comment-79

Iadh: 0. Thanks for the feedback. 1. Happy to clarify/expand on the blog track efforts. Am I correct in assuming that your general result was that from 17% known spam blogs, systems retrieved abo...

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/efficient-and-effective-spam-filtering-and-re-ranking-for-large-web-datasets/#comment-72

The claim in the paper implies that there was no work done to assess the effect of spam within the blog track framework. This is simply incorrect. You could argue about the adopted approach withi...

https://nonrel.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/efficient-and-effective-spam-filtering-and-re-ranking-for-large-web-datasets/#comment-71