was Fuzzy Search shelved?

on Dec 29, 2011 Bob Pritchett stated "We anticipate bringing back fuzzy search as well."

is it still planned or has been abandoned?

There is a HUGE value in it especially related to searches involving proper names because misspellings often produce no results.

would love to see Fuzzy Search in Logos!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

[Y]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610466#Comment_610466

AFAIK it's still epected

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610591#Comment_610591

We just have to be patient.

toughski

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610597#Comment_610597

We just have to be patient.

you just had to use this word, hadn't you? I hope Logos does not follow the pattern of God promising a son to Abram. Although it has not been 23 years yet, this has dragged on since 2009, I believe. What I would like to ask Logos is to stop making FAKE promises. Maybe instead of saying "we anticipate" or "we plan" they should say "we wish."

in addition, Logos can come out and say "we definitely are NOT planning to introduce <feature> this year"

Here we are not talking about some fringe feature. I wonder if Logos has statistics for how many of their searches come up blank and the reasons why. Fuzzy search is fundamental in finding information in users' large libraries.

here are some Google statistics:

50% of 6 million monthly Google Play search terms are misspelled
for example, “Britney Spears” is misspelled 20 percent of the time in Google, and there are about 600 common misspellings of her name, according to Google founder Sergey Brin. Here are different ways that Google users happen to misspell their targeted keywords:
1.) Flat out misspelling words
Example: britney spears–>brittany spears

2.) Hitting the wrong key
Example: britney spears–> brotney spears

3.) Hitting a letter one too many times
Example: britney spears–> brittney spears

4.) Omitting a letter (especially while typing on these "chiclet" laptop keyboards nowadays)
Example: britney spears–> britny spears

5.) Transposing letters
Example: britney spears—> britneys pears

now, “Britney Spears” is a sensible North American name. Is it too much of a stretch to assume that Nebuchadnezzar, and Abednego would be misspelled?

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610628#Comment_610628

I don't anticipate shipping Fuzzy Search this year.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610725#Comment_610725

Wow, Bradley. What a way to deflate expectations. Do you still plan to do it someday?

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610726#Comment_610726

Wow, Bradley. What a way to deflate expectations. Do you still plan to do it someday?

I wonder if somebody in Logos marketing has learned that great customer approval quote - "always under-promise and over-deliver"

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610726#Comment_610726

Do you still plan to do it someday?

A poster has suggested in this thread that I shouldn't use the words "we plan", so I think it would be inadvisable to answer this question (since I can't predict how things will change, and I'd rather not be accused of making a "FAKE promise").

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610752#Comment_610752

"FAKE promise"

Obviously written by someone who needs to do a word study on the English word "plan" ... and I have a list of suggestions for tools to make the word study more linguistically and visually oriented. I think you promised me 400 additional programmers devoted to the PC version of Logo 5 by February 30th.[;)]

David A Egolf

We discussed a different kind of "fuzzy" search at our Phoenix Logos Users Group meeting last Thursday. One of our members said that he had had great success using Google to locate Bible verses when he couldn't remember the correct wording.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610894#Comment_610894

We discussed a different kind of "fuzzy" search at our Phoenix Logos Users Group meeting last Thursday. One of our members said that he had had great success using Google to locate Bible verses when he couldn't remember the correct wording.

Yup, I do that too. Too bad. I really wish I could do all my Bible searching within Logos.

Milkman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610894#Comment_610894

I agree. Wish we had it again.

We discussed a different kind of "fuzzy" search at our Phoenix Logos Users Group meeting last Thursday. One of our members said that he had had great success using Google to locate Bible verses when he couldn't remember the correct wording.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611013#Comment_611013

features is an alternative software that should be in Logos:

find similar phrases with the [FUZZY], allusions with the [INFER] command, or words that occur a specified number of times in a given search range with the [COUNT] command

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611052#Comment_611052

Since the Logos official has been accused of anticipation deflation, I thought, well, heh .... maybe there's a business opportunity here?

Anyone wanting to see a fuzzy logic query can simply ask on this thread, attach maybe a dollar to your question (just tape it to your screen; I'll go around and pick them up later), and I'll be happy to gin Libby up to answer the question!

Here's a sample: .2548.fuzzy.txt.

It's really quite interesting. I simply typed in 'Abraham son' and 9 Bibles. If you look at the list, it first tries a more direct match, then maybe a mispelling (son vs one), re-ordering, and then a fascinating shift to 'father' and eventually 'offspring' ... I guess they coded that in?

Kind of interesting. By the way, if you don't have the $1, then just forget it. Libby's a tough lady. And if you do have the $1, well, we probably better forget that too. Libby hates to embarrass the Logos team.

David A Egolf

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611062#Comment_611062

Here's a sample: .2548.fuzzy.txt.

I thought the sample was really interesting until I saw the last line: "There were no results for this search."

So apparently everything we were reading was "no results". I guess that is pretty fuzzy, as things go. [;)]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611067#Comment_611067

That was back in the days when Logos coders had a humbling sense of humor. Instead of later bragging about 12,342,121 results that you can't use.

Actually the phrase isn't in the original display; it only gets picked up with a select-all/copy. Maybe part of Libby's dieing words.

Not displayed in the text file, the Libronix coders even highlighted which words they were working off of (e.g. spellings, equivalents, etc). Even Google doesn't do that!

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610899#Comment_610899

I really wish I could do all my Bible searching within Logos.

Me too.

Michael Sheaver

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611074#Comment_611074

Everyone,

I agree with the need for fuzzy search within Logos/Verbum, but we must understand that it is a very complex feature to implement. The reason that Google is so good at fuzzy searches is that they have thousands of engineers and millions of dollars devoted to developing this technology. Logos is a small company that does not have these kinds of resources. In addition, the Logos/Verbum software uses open source the Emdros text database engine (http://www.emdros.org), and it appears to not support fuzzy search in its current iteration. In short, let us have some more patience and compassion on the great folks at Logos.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611338#Comment_611338

Michael, I see no reason why Logos couldn't hire some of the Libronix coders, and then go from there. If Libronix can figure it out, why can't Logos?

And the fact that the Libronix users didn't use it much (according to the Libronix executives) should be ignored. Logos is different.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611340#Comment_611340

I agree with the need for fuzzy search within Logos/Verbum, but we must understand that it is a very complex feature to implement. The reason that Google is so good at fuzzy searches is that they have thousands of engineers and millions of dollars devoted to developing this technology. Logos is a small company that does not have these kinds of resources.

Michael, perhaps you are new to Logos since version 4 or 5, but the reason so many of us are impatient for fuzzy search is that it used to be there in Logos 3 (aka Libronix), and they took it out when they rewrote the engine. Or rather they neglected to port that feature over to the new engine. That was in 2009, and we've been asking for them to put it back ever since then. There have been little hints that they intend to do it someday, but it apparently isn't a high priority. Logos listens to user input to help set their priorities, so we're just trying to raise the volume on our requests a bit so that they bump the priority of this feature up higher. Please don't try to silence us.

In addition, the Logos/Verbum software uses open source the Emdros text database engine (http://www.emdros.org), and it appears to not support fuzzy search in its current iteration.

Logos is a search company. That is its primary strength, and they know how to do fuzzy search, as they've done it before. If Logos/Verbum is built on an open source database engine, they can modify the source code to make it do what they want. Yes, Google has thousands of engineers, but they are searching the entire internet, and Logos is searching a known and finite base of texts. And, to repeat, they know how to do this, as they've done it before. It is not too much to ask that they put it back in.

I see no reason why Logos couldn't hire some of the Libronix coders, and then go from there. If Libronix can figure it out, why can't Logos?

The Libronix coders are/were Logos employees already. Most of them are probably still coding for Logos, or if they're not then there is a good reason for it (either Logos fired them or they quit) and they aren't likely to get hired back.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611340#Comment_611340

If Libronix can figure it out, why can't Logos?

Denise, you are being silly here. Logos and Libronix are the same company with the same staff subject to the standard turnover. If you wish to encourage the feature to be returned to the Logos product, you need to exert pressure in a reasonable manner including effective rhetoric.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611340#Comment_611340

Michael, I see no reason why Logos couldn't hire some of the Libronix coders, and then go from there. If Libronix can figure it out, why can't Logos?

Don't worry, Denise; I got it. Very droll.

Denise, you are being silly here.

Just here? [:P]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611363#Comment_611363

Oh, you guys. You shouldn't play the silly card so fast (I always like discourse imaged as a poker game).

First, my opinion (and indeed mine) is that Logos changed with Logos4. Logos and Libronix didn't come from the same company. I could opine reasons and all of them be wrong. But my impression is 'marketing'. And feature creation became a marketing functionality, especially relative to quality. That's why I think so much of Logos4/5 is not easy to pick up, since the feature is coded and then they're off to their next feature. Is this Amazon-driven? Maybe. Survival? Maybe it's all unavoidable.

Myself, I lived 'fuzzy' and neural nets for decades before I got kicked 'upstairs'. We built it into our competitive systems, so that as Walmart grew, we grew faster. And so I spent a day in the Walmart CIO's office telling the future Sams CEO to get some coders (joking; he wasn't amused). I still browse Walmarts watching their systems, trying to understand their periodic failures. Today my Bible software has built in neural along with fuzzy. And heavy-duty visualization routines to make sense of it. In my mind, a dorky lady that's barely an amateur should be the lowest common denominator; Christian Bible study-iers deserve more than one more search routine.

So, yes, I joke about Libronix. But not entirely in fun. So many times, five years after it was superceded, I marvel at some of their ideas. And judging from its pervasiveness, there had to have been a whole series of dreamers that were driven to achieve something great.

And lastly, you both are far more experienced, talented, and knowledgable than me. You couldn't spend so much time on Logos without also having dreams. Plus don't be impressed by my time spent with Walmart ... they were trying to get around their court battle with the Walmart women.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611407#Comment_611407

Myself, I lived 'fuzzy' and neural nets for decades before I got kicked 'upstairs'.

Then you should be great support for my vision of cross-references, parallels, quotes and allusions, lectionary day-mates, chiasms, shared images . . . being one large network with named, color-coded relationships - the perfect navigation for Bible study. Shall we hire Bob to accept our specs?

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611516#Comment_611516

I don't know exactly how Logos has their data arranged. I assume they store it relative to ease of matching, later to be fed into whatever feature is on the plate. At least that's what I've observed, watching how fast Rick can do things, versus what he skips over.

In that sense, your ideas would be easy potatoes for a neural net and almost do-able even with a tablet (e.g. not particularly data intensive to calculate, even on the fly). I'm not a big enthusiast for traditional fuzzy logic/searches, without neural nets doing the background work.

Your connecting the lectionaries would be particularly good. I'm not Catholic (and more importantly I'm completely ignorant of Catholicism), but I really think Logos aka Verbum could be re-imagined with what you're thinking. My impression is Catholicism is very visual and conceptual (e.g. day, personage, attribute, event, etc). And the same underlying structures could be re-imagined for high-end 'lay' Christian users.

Regarding Bob, I wonder where he's going (no offense intended). He expresses the excitement of self-learning, builds huge engines to support the same, but avoids the frosting on the cake. Burned once, shy twice? Or these days, frosting's too much a luxury?

Jeff Jackson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/610894#Comment_610894

We discussed a different kind of "fuzzy" search at our Phoenix Logos Users Group meeting last Thursday. One of our members said that he had had great success using Google to locate Bible verses when he couldn't remember the correct wording.

David, does this "Phoenix Logos Users Group" meet in real life? Could I get some information about it? I live in the area and might be interested in dropping in on your meetings some time.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/611522#Comment_611522

I don't know exactly how Logos has their data arranged. I assume they store it relative to ease of matching, later to be fed into whatever feature is on the plate. At least that's what I've observed, watching how fast Rick can do things, versus what he skips over.

Is Rick/Richard your new nickname for Logos 5? Richard has an interesting array of possible nicknames nested beneath it.

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/672155#Comment_672155

Is Rick/Richard your new nickname for Logos 6?

Unlikely as Denise used the term in July[:)]

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/672161#Comment_672161

see edited post

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/672162#Comment_672162

see edited post

[:)]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/672168#Comment_672168

abondservent, 'Rick' referred to Rick Brannon at Logos/Faithlife. Between him and Dr Heiser, they represent the bulk of smartness there in Bellingham.

Logos, the software, doesn't seem to emminate (sp?) 'humanness' ... more a lazy bulldog waddling around.

David A Egolf

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/666523#Comment_666523

Yes, we meet at a home near 43rd Ave and Thunderbird. We haven't met since September or October since some of us met for Greek. I fear that Logos 6 will cause some fragmentation because several members have not upgraded and those of us that have will be interested is discussing new features. We use a projector to review features and hold lessons on best practices we have found. Most of us are not very sophisticated with the software but are computer mavens.

If you are interested, we can meet up on Faithlife. Would you like an invite to our private online group?

Quick Links

Recent Posts
Activity
Unanswered