Slashdot Mirror
Google Launches Scholar Beta
Jaidev writes "'Stand on the shoulders of giants' is what Google claims its new service allows you to do. Google Scholar enables you to search specifically for scholarly literature, including peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, preprints, abstracts and technical reports from all broad areas of research. Use Google Scholar to find articles from a wide variety of academic publishers, professional societies, preprint repositories and universities, as well as scholarly articles available across the web."
A typo seen in the first character?! CoyboyNeal, this must be a record!
Oh, and maybe this was a dream, but wasn't Google Scholar launched a long time ago? Nope, wasn't a dream: this entry in the google blog (dated October 18th 2004) announces the launch of the beta version. Although scholar is still in beta, surely it shouldn't be referred to as google's "new" service. This story is also (needless to say) a Dupe.
They should have just cut to the chase and called it Google Homework.
Drag n' Drop DVD Recommendations
Uh, I've been using this for a while.
Because back in January I used it to do research for a paper.
Go to the w3.org and put Slashdot.org through the validator.
Thank you for posting this informative information, next would you mind running a story on google maps, google news, and maybe google firefox toolbar?
I can't believe these people are making more money than I am.
Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
One problem with standing on the shoulders of giants:
You have to figure out how to climb them first.
Seriously, though, this seems like what the internet was meant to be, back in "the day." IIRC, the 'net started out as an joint initiative involving the government and several academic institutions as a means of creating a repository of knowledge. I'm glad Google is getting into this game, since they seem to have a pretty solid search method figured out. Besides, it could certainly make researching for my thesis a bit easier.
I am scientifically inaccurate.
Google Scholar was launched 11/18/04.
Professors don't like it when I use multiple Wikipedia references...
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
This has been live as a Beta for more than a few months, and has been discussed on Slashdot a couple of times.
and 1st post!
Really?
My journal. Mainly about freedom.
The service has been around at least for a year. What exactly has been added to it now?
Google Keyhole, Google Scholar from November. Daddypants? Ignored!
Does it not bother anyone but me that this will give Google a monstrous research edge, as they will be able to determine trend data, as well as searches that have no results, meaning items that have not yet been researched or published. I find this extremely disturbing that a company can do that.
This service has been out for a long time, but dupe aside, it is a very useful site. Academically, it allows you to search journal articles without having to sift through all of the other junk generated with a standard Google search. I am a big fan of this site and I use it quite often.
Voice your opinion!
In related news, Google announced today that they're going to hold their IPO.
Google Scholar has been around, in beta, since November 2004. /. Where old news is good news.
This previous article claims that Google Scholar was inferior compared to other services like Highwire. Has it been changed much in the last month, or is it still not as good as it could be?
Yes, I realize that it's still in "beta", but "beta" may as well mean "v1.0" to google.
2 months after i'm out of school
I have been using this service for over half a year now, as long as it is integrated in my Firefox toolbar (The way I found out). What is the fuzz about it? Why is it on /.?
Actually is it really helpfull to find the 'meaningfull' papers (# of citations) in most subjects as a starting point for research. But it cannot beat to search through, and compare references of papers in a subject.
next, google runs for president.
they are taking over the world I tell you!
I just used Scholar this morning looking for an abstract from the American Society of Criminology's "CRIMINOLOGY & Public Policy" journal.
c jrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/grants/207824.pdf
The original abstract:
"Trajectories of Crime at Places: A Longitudinal Study of Street Segments in the City of Seattle"
Criminology & Public Policy, American Society of Criminology
Vol. 42 (2), May 2004, pp.283-322.
David Weisburd, Shawn Bushway, Cynthia Lum, Sue-Ming Yang
Yielded this from Google Scholar:
THE CRIMINAL CAREERS OF PLACES: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY
http://scholar.google.com/url?sa=U&q=http://www.n
David Weisburd, Ph.D. Principal Investigator University of Maryland, College Park & The Hebrew University, Jerusalem Cynthia Lum, Ph.D. Project Director Northeastern University, Boston Sue-Ming Yang, M.A. Research Assistant University of Maryland, College Park
July 31, 2004
National Institute of Justice, DOJ
A subsequent NIJ grant funded report based on the abstract I was looking for.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/15/144723 2&from=rss Google Scholar sucks because it can't count accurately, and it does a crappy job of searching by date, and it doesn't consider variations on names.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/11/19 24254&tid=217&tid=123&tid=146 The American Chemical Society (maker of SciFinder Scholar) sues Google over Google Scholar.
http://slashdot.org/articles/04/11/18/1317241.shtm l?tid=217&tid=188 Google Scholar. It exists.
Sounds to me like that last one makes this story a dupe, unless Google Scholar has gone from release back to beta in the meantime. Given the first article, that may be the case.
Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult;
whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse.
--Proverbs 9:7
Google beta launched! New search engine which promises to organized the world's information neatly. You can find it here.
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
Google today also launched World Wide Web Search Beta, which Google claims allows you to search over 8 billion web pages and provides more relevant results based on their new PageRank algorithm.
-ashot
This is probably the worst example of editing I've seen on Slashdot yet. Not only is the story a dupe (I've been using Google Scholar for ages), but there is a spelling mistake on the first character. Does Slashdot have the ability to delete stories by any chance?
I think the Slashdot editors/owners should come out and tell us (the paying customers) if this is indeed the case.
"If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants."
- Isaac Newton
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders."
- Hal Abelson
"In computer science, we stand on each other's feet."
- Brian Reid
the REAL news is that Google have just released a search engine!
Anyway, I'm off to try out the new beta of Windows 95...
Fine, maybe my cable ISP is using a proxy, but it leads me to wonder of these sites which have lived in quiet scholorly isolation until now are up to being Googled.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Back when *I* was a lad, betas were inflicted on small percentages of the final end-user market, not broadly marketed to everyone with 'beta' serving as a mere disclaimer and caveat. Google in particular, seems to have never ending betas of everything. If it's labelled untested, not to be relied upon and subject to change, just wake me when it's done, OK?
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
Dupe or not..It seems Jon Katz's article on slashdot itself is cited.
A new way for the chronically stupid to obtain degrees enabling them to build bridges.
Me (Blog)
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
I'm unable to find stuff published in my field this year with google scholar (including 2 of my papers).
The Raven
Google about Google Scholar to find out when it was released before posting it... remember.. Google Search came out only a week ago, and is still relatively new and can help you find information on the net.
Google co-founder caught masturbating in employee lounge!
There should be a system where people can moderate which articles get accepted. This just sucks. Google scholar is like 15 months old. News generally entails NEW happenings.
Invented at CERN... which is where I'll hopefully be working in another few years :) http://www.hitmill.com/internet/web_history.html
SIGSEGV caught, terminating
wait... not that kind of sig.
But did they use a text from Google Scholar on how best to shoot people? If not, then it's off topic. And 'execution' is death meted out by due process. This is either murder or killed while resisting arrest.
Me (Blog)
This still doesn't hold a candle to a good university library site. Finding good academic articles is still all about context context context. You need to know what journals you want, what authors aren't crackpots, etc ec. My own university's library system (U of Minnesota), www.lib.umn.edu, has great research guides to help provide that context.
As an example, A Google Scholar search for Kafka doens't have the sort of literary references I'm looking for until the third page. Is it just that scientific articles are more likely the be available on the web?
One very good thing about Google Scholar is that it specifically searches references. This is an advance, and further work on the engine should be in this direction (I'm thinking a visual web of articles). The first thing you do when you find a halfway decent article is check out its references and then go and grab those, *especially* if more than one article references something. It's often hard to know what the really important watershed articles and books are in a given subject when you're new to it (again with the context). A quick, visual chart or web of articles and the articles they reference would be awesome for figuring that out. Something like their score for web pages but based solely on references. This is already how it works (hits are sorted by the number of articles that have cited them), but it sure would be nice to be able to, say, check articles that fit your search genre and uncheck those that don't. I could then uncheck the scientific articles and watch the literary ones move up on my search.
Rambling now. Done now
Um, this has been running over a year now.
How is this news today?
09-f9-11-02-9* (G^GCA_++{>. RV>>>>+++ NO CARRIER
Google launches cool new web software. Not news.
It's beta. Not news.
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach him to fish and he'll wipe out the species.
Wouldnt the target crowd for scholar already have access to JSTOR, Academic Search Premier, LexisNexis, ect? All of these have full text, which is much more useful than a citation. I tried using it once or twice, not much good came out of it.
How much of google's offerings aren't in beta?
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
what about http://moon.google.com/ ? I haven't seen it here on /. yet....
It's totaly useless unless there is an option to only find ps/pdf files/downloadable ebooks or html files that contains an unusual large amount of "=".
The only results I've gotten from Google Scholar are links to ACM publications that require a $100/year subscription fee to access. Hopefully, Google Scholar has improved since then.
9/11 Eyewitnesses to Explosive WTC Demolition 1 of 2
Funny how many people in this thread commented on this story without appearing to know that Google Scholar has already been available for ages. Just goes to show that this site main target group is really 13 year old 1337 dudes, as anyone seriously interested in computer science (or, for that matter, any other research subject) uses Google Scholar almost on a daily basis.
And don't even get me started on the editor not knowing about it either...
Today in other news a fresh new search engine is wowing all comers with it's simple design and elegant solution to searching the web. I hope someone submits a story about this new fangled search engine to /., people need to know about google, it's tremendous.
dupolicious.
Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
As much as I love Google, I'm so tired of hearing about every little movement the company makes. They just happen to do good services, it's not like they NEED this constant media coverage when there's more important stuff to check in the headlines.
Hold on a sec, my "Google" google alerts just made their way into my inbox, time to check..
space is pretty cool.
Oh, what might have been...
And when is scholar.google.com going to support exporting to BibTeX-style citations?
Huh? Huh? Huh!?
-- Rolf Lindgren, cand.psychol
The practice of hyping up every single event involving Google, or, in the absence of news, slight changes in air pressure.
---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
Check this one out.
i el5/18/22693/01055638.pdf
New directions in cryptography.
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/
Is there a list round of the famous pieces yet?
Try Franz Kafka. I'm guessing anything done by a guy named Kafka in the last fifty years, hence relevant to current research, is not what you're looking for. The priority is to serve the bleeding edge and worry about history eventually.
It's really great for science, simply for transparent navigation. The convenience over the library system (search title, select journal, login, find year, find volume, find article) or existing frontends (login, select author/title/keyword, worry about syntax, hope what you want is in the DB) isn't brain surgery. But it's quite nice.
There's about a 25-year availability sweet spot between "too old to have been digitized yet" and "recent enough the publisher is still ekeing profits out of a subscription model." Any impetus for improvement to belongs to copyright holders. Their fees come from schools, and recent years have seen their own microcosm of BS from certain money-grubbing weasels.
The short version is that libraries' print catalogues just shrank because Elsevier decided to price-gouge; generic numbers are $1M at x% of total journals = 10x% of journal budget. The contract says anything you cancel makes everything you keep cost more.
It's a tempest in a teacup, but so was the price of a CD in 1995.
you can have my violent video games when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.
Prime UID Club
The first thing universities do when they realize their pages are being hit is lock out the goonies who don't pay tuition. The old internet of two or three years ago is dead, dead, dead, and everything useful is corralled in gated communities. It's fun seeing Google trying to game itself in order to stay relevant and offer ANYTHING that hasn't already been smothered under the sludge of commerce.
``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
When is Google going to add a way for us
to search in ALL their databases (News, Groups, Scolar, books, etc)???!!!
Following is the related fortune-mod entry. Was one of my favorites.
"If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants."
-- Isaac Newton
"In the sciences, we are now uniquely priviledged to sit side by side with the giants on whose shoulders we stand."
-- Gerald Holton
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders."
-- Hal Abelson
"Mathematicians stand on each other's shoulders."
-- Gauss
"Mathemeticians stand on each other's shoulders while computer scientists stand on each other's toes."
-- Richard Hamming
"It has been said that physicists stand on one another's shoulders. If this is the case, then programmers stand on one another's toes, and software engineers dig each other's graves."
-- Unknown
Google keeps pumping out these incredibly useful internet tools which I think are great... but I worry that Google will someday be synonymous with "the internet". The common person won't know what "the internet" actually is anymore when everything they need to do online is handled by Google. What happens when Google goes bad? I know they are well liked at the moment and considered underdogs against evil empires like microsoft... but they will eventually go bad. All powerful corporate controlled entities do.
Meh.
And here I thought I'd never be able to find links to the ACM's portal page asking me to pay grotesque fees to access their papers! Truly this is a great step forward toward the free exchange of information! I for one nibble the knobs of our new Google overlords!
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
I tried a search for "nanotechnology", and got a bunch of links that all required either a paid subscription or a login for which I was not allowed to register. Bogus.
Great, now if I want to bore :) myself reading Scientific American, and can use Google Scolar instead!
I wish it would be as useful as http://www.ams.org/mathscinet MathSciNet is for math papers. I can't find any math paper as easily on google scholar as I can on MathSciNet.
Submitted this 3 months ago, and it was old then
I am google schoolar + PubMed addict, so my opinion is not objective at all.
Google schoolar pros:
* full text search,
* save a lot of time because it shows a few lines of text surrounding your query,
* articles at the top have highest number of citations, so I know what is popular/respected publication,
* in advanced search I can select publications from the last year(s) with not so many citations,
* each publication has a link listing who cite this publication (some journals do not provide such a list),
cons:
* If your query words are common, there is very little you can do to narrow the search results,
* areas that are not publication-driven (computer science?) does not cite others so often and are not well organized by google scholar (in contrast for example to life sciences),
* if you do not know what are you looking for, then google scholar is not good for you,
* if you like (or have time) to read the whole papers (instead of just interesting parts) probably you shoud go to the library, not Internet.
etc.
Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)
This sig is false.
moon.google.com
:)
zoom to the highest level to see what the moon is made of
I though Google search was supposed to be the ultimate search engine. Why do we need Google Scholar? Does the search engine need help by segmenting the web into smaller pieces?
Yeah but G Scholar doesn't take you to any FREE resources... just PAY for PAPERS resources. This has gt to be a money maker for Google... erhaps a littlemoney in their pocket for everyone who signs up for teh pay services? SDotters shoudl realize that all the papers they are (mis)lead to by Google can be had for free on sites not listed by Google... a good example of which is citeseer which has all the papers that the ACM has except they are free... thank GOD for citeseer.... and put something in the donation bucket for them while you're downloading
n/t
What really bugs me, though, is the lack of proper name handling. Scholar seems to interpret searches quite literally, whereas pubmed, for example, translates queries. Try the following searches to see what I mean:
Gunn WG
Gunn WG
Gunn W
W Gunn
Pubmed will find all three references for "WG Gunn" in a search for "gunn W", and a 1/3 instances of WG Gunn in a search for "William Gunn", however, it chokes on "WG Gunn". Scholar finds only 2/3 instances of "WG Gunn" in a search for exactly that, but never "wg gunn" in a search for "william gunn", and searching for "w gunn" turns up nothing for "wg gunn", however, there are results for wj gunn and ws gunn.
It's tricky, but necessary, for a scholarly database to get this right. "w gunn" should turn up "w gunn" as well every record where the first name starts with g, including both the ones with and without a middle initial. "william gunn" should turn up the set of results included in "w gunn", "william gunn", and "wg gunn". "wg gunn" should also turn up every record of "wg gunn" in addition to the set of results where the first name begins with w, the second name begins with g and the last name is gunn. "Gunn WG" should be identical to "WG Gunn".
When doing name searches, if in doubt, include the result. People are more likely to be put out if their articles don't turn up where they should than if they do turn up where they shouldn't. I mean, the whole point of publishing is to get your work out there so other people can read it, right?
There is a problem, specifically that a common name will return too many hits. "Smith B" turns up over 4000 hits on pubmed and 4 on Scholar, whereas "b smith" turns up 39000 on Scholar and nothing on pubmed (the query gets translated unless you specify that it's an author search) but too many results is never as bad as too little in an author search, because you can further narrow using date ranges, initials, and keywords.
This is so last year.