IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamist/v53y2002i10p783-788.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relevance of Web documents: Ghosts consensus method

Author

Listed:
  • Andrey L. Gorbunov

Abstract

The dominant method currently used to improve the quality of Internet search systems is often called “digital democracy.” Such an approach implies the utilization of the majority opinion of Internet users to determine the most relevant documents: for example, citation index usage for sorting of search results (google.com) or an enrichment of a query with terms that are asked frequently in relation with the query's theme. “Digital democracy” is an effective instrument in many cases, but it has an unavoidable shortcoming, which is a matter of principle: the average intellectual and cultural level of Internet users is very low—everyone knows what kind of information is dominant in Internet query statistics. Therefore, when one searches the Internet by means of “digital democracy” systems, one gets answers that reflect an underlying assumption that the user's mind potential is very low, and that his cultural interests are not demanding. Thus, it is more correct to use the term “digital ochlocracy” to refer to Internet search systems with “digital democracy.” Based on the well‐known mathematical mechanism of linear programming, we propose a method to solve the indicated problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrey L. Gorbunov, 2002. "Relevance of Web documents: Ghosts consensus method," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 53(10), pages 783-788.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:53:y:2002:i:10:p:783-788
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.10088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10088
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.10088?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:53:y:2002:i:10:p:783-788. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.