Future SEO - Knowledge Graph, Satori, Pregel, and ReduceMap

The more and more I dig into what's going on, the more certain articles come to light that sort of paint a picture..and a good one, of sorts at that. This kind of post may be lost amongst some of the kiddies here, but if you're into understanding why the search indicies are behaving the way they are, take a look at THIS article - http://arstechnica.com/information-...oogles-knowledge-graph-and-microsofts-satori/

And make sure you read through a lot of the hyperlinked documents embedded in the article. Backlinks will always be part of the equation, but they are NOT the equation anymore as much as some of us have relied on them. I say it paints a good picture because SEO isn't dead, it's just evolving. This new index that Google is throwing out there is different by design. Penguin penalized the hell out of random sites and sites that showed over optimization enthusiasm. This new knowledgebase (look up Freebase) format of delivering search results is truly built on graphical relationships.

I need to do more reading on entities and shortest distance graphing, but one thing is for sure, in order to properly play into Google's new Web 3.0, we'll need to understand the contextual onsite offerings of our websites and how THAT can be referenced or added to the entity relationship listing of whatever niche we're playing in. It seems if there's an established ontology, Google already has the top players in that family tree known and listed as authority sites. In large part THAT is why you see some of the big boys dominating those spots. If you have a site that dominatd a sub-sub niche and ranked in the top 5 for a long time, and you DIDN'T get whacked with with the penalty flag during penguin, i wonder if your site is now at the top of the ontology relationship tree.

Just some things to think about.

mate - the silence in this thread is deafening.

I think it went over the heads of the weekend crowd. Maybe bump this thread monday morning and and try to get some discussion going.

Yea, I figured as much when I posted it. I'll try it again on Monday. I'm hoping more people will read this and start thinking out side the box

Fucking bump!

No worries.

One can have a hugely complex ranking algorithm to produce results. It matters not because we have the ultimate age of marketing weapon called "split testing".

Now start split testing!

Yea, I get the split testing part. But in essence, we need to understand from a graphical point of view WHERE our sites sit and WHY. If Google is pinpointing factors on each site, adding it to the overall graph, what we can do to get on the radar to become a point of reference within that entity (or niche for a better term). Given another 24 hours of thinking about it, my gut is telling me that rich media sites with really good offsite linking to other "of-like" niche sites will enable a site to get on Google's ranking radar graph...depending on how entrenched the top authority family is already built out. My guess is if you're involved in a sub niche that isn't heavily populated, now is the time to strike to establish that you should be at the top of the food chain.

Mapreduce is just a function of Google to index up sites and adjust the indexes. THAT is why you see so much dancing going on, in my opinion. It's an off-network adjustment to the database that filters its way to the main production index that we all know and love/hate.

Came across this site last night and this guy sums everything up based on my research:

"Want evidence?Every month or so since Panda launched, there would be an update. Sites would drop or recover.
Pretty much any time you see periodic big changes in Google, you can assume it is because whatever affected the change is underpinned by MapReduce and you would probably be right most of the time.
But Google representatives further confirmed that Panda is underpinned by MapReduce or a MapReduce-like process in the Inside Search Blog's 50 Changes for March post:
Sounds an awful lot like MapReduce but it doesn't matter if it is or not.
We just need to establish that some processes are run offline and pushed periodically while indexing is incremental and immediate.
The difference between the two is the difference between Dumb Google that ranks new documents quickly and Smart Google that critically evaluates ranking signals to see if they should actually count.
Google admits in the Percolator paper that Percolator is not always the answer for web-scale processing:
So when a new site is ranking using a spammy SEO tactic, it most likely means that the process to devalue that tactic runs offline on MapReduce and it will continue to rank until the next time Google can spare the resources to run the process."

http://seoontap.com/seo/spammy-seo-tactics.html

This seems to be a very interesting read & discussion, but it's going to be far more interesting at 6.00 mondaymorning when my mind is concentrated on IM instead of on my 1.5 year old daughter who is calling for my attention right now!

Blackouts, I hear you man..my 2 little ones just went down for a nap, so I've got time to sit here and post stuff up. Don't mind me if want I put on here seems a little helter skelter..I think I'm on to something, but I need to type stuff out to get there, if you know what I mean.

Something else I just came across. I want to cross reference the results with some other ideas of mine as well...

http://www.touchgraph.com/seo/

Thanks for the articles. It answers a lot of questions that have been lingering at the back of my mind.

Here's another thing:


"Google Knowledge Graph is going to train users to expect the type of enterprise search experience that only a good, relevant taxonomy and tagging strategy can make possible. Whereas Google Knowledge Graph is using a robust ontology of all topics to surface such information, an enterprise just needs a good taxonomy (or taxonomies) of topics important to their business. It's a very achievable task (particularly if you have a good taxonomy to start with).


Google has just helped educate the masses - taxonomy is about to get big."


This sort of speaks volumes why Google is desperate to get Google+ rolling. Facebook allows for an up to date taxonomy/ontology update because people are talking about what is relevant and topical. Google WANTS to display that information as fast as possible..problem is getting access to that data. IF Google+ takes off, they'll have that taxonomy rich data to build out their database even more and display a search engine result that gives the end user what they need.


Question: Google "Leonardo da vinci" and you'll see a content rich "knowledge graph" display page. Much of this info already exists if you crawl through wikipedia or other easily accessible online open databases. Makes Google's job easier..so why is it that serp page is built out but this one isn't? Google: "uconn mens basketball"


Where's the love?


Now Google "Boston Celtics"


Ah, there's the love!


Answer: I'm not sure yet. One's a famous painter, another is a college basketball team, and another is a pro basketball team.


I think the taxonomys and ontologies are still being built out. The information to populate that page will come from either the public domain or by how often people search for those search terms. Entities will need to be developed and then sites will all be collected and referenced under that entity/family/ontology, etc

For those not in the know about taxonomies, here's a brief snippet:

Taxonomies
In many user interfaces of traditional online research products taxonomies are used for browsing the content: they allow access to information organized according to a faceted classification system, making it possible for the users to explore a collection of information by applying multiple filters.


Taxonomies are also used in specific vertical search masks for pre-selecting topics and restricting the result.

This will certainly redefine how we use and build backlinks.

It also gives some insight into why one of my websites is behaving in the SERPS as it is. It actually has certain relationships with other (authority) sites I have created, that might be effecting how Google is building the entity data.

On a hunt right now for certain tools that I thought existed out there on the web..visual keyword mapping.

Just found this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFwVVXDxyY4

For $17 I think I'll get it. I'd like if that tool was able to do a right click on each keyword box and show a top 10 serp results also. But it's a good start to show keyword spectrums with a taxonomy of sorts.

Picked it up as a wso for $13. If you get it, use this guy's recommended usage..

---------------

I been ranking within days once google sees relevancy on my sites, this software is great to build that relevancy. Here is what I do:
A)Create a Strong Relevancy keyword check and discriminate the terms that you can logically build a page for. Use the exact keyword in the URL and use an scramble human-friendly tittle with your keyword. For instance, I want my root domain to rank for "how to lose weight", I create 10 mini pages (over the days, not at once) with the kw that the KwM suggests and link to my root domain.


B)Use the general relevancy for that keyword and write a post/page using the terms it gives you. Do not use the "seed terms", G already knows what your website is about cause of your URL, just use the "extra". For instance, in order for G to see relevancy in a blog post related to "how to lose weight" you need to include the "extra" terms given int he KwM (NOT the whole keyword, if you get "how to lose weight fast" only use the word "fast"). You get something like "If you want to know how to lose weight, then you need to follow this SIMPLE techniques that will GUARANTEE FAST results within weeks. It is now MEDICALLY possible to archive a perfect weight just by using this BLOG and the right keywords."


C)Once you have your blog post created, make sure you format it by highling text, bolding, italicising, etc. It is not necessary to "scream" at G that your post is about "how to lose weight", they already know because of your URL. Add images and talk in first person. I think that G really likes it because they feel intimacy with you.
D) ALWAYS LINK TO AN AUTHORITY SITE and to your main page/post. You still need social signals, like tweets and FB likes. I found out that g+ are not working any more for general searches, they only affect the user's circles, not the general SERP results. Twitter is still the best way to send the spiders to your content.

---------------

So this sort of speaks inline with my thinking of entities, outlinking to authority sites from your own site to SHOW Google that you're part of the family and so on.

A very nice tool that will have a lot of other uses too. I went and got a copy.

That guys suggestions should also work for off-site seo.

really cool...bump worthy. thanks

definitely a good read - thank you for bringing this up...
...and a real good find i think is the tool shown in the video. pretty usefull.

thx&rep given.

I've stalled out some of my thought process on this..information overload. But one thing I keep coming back to is the fact that we may be approaching this ranking process in Google the wrong way - throwing backlinks at a site and hoping it'll stick.

So far from my experience, if a site has been penalized, it's going to be ROUGH to get that thing to rank again. It all depends on how much of a penalty that site has received in my opinion. If I were to build a new site right now, my inclination is to go all out and build a content rich media site.pics, videos, embedded wiki, etc. I think I'd shoot for trying to hit as many entity ranking factors as much as possible. We're not in the realm of keywords anymore, although keywords do play a part. Google's semantic indexing will take care of keyword usage if the content is good enough.

Oh, and another thing: we're going to need a bigger boat..

no, just kidding, actually what I meant is that we'll need to start optimizing for objects or entities that IS the subject matter of our sites. In a way, it's about keywords, and another it's not. It's how we link out from within a paragraph, what we'll need to link to, and how our content is composed. Our mindset will need to be focused on giving Google what it wants from an entity contribution perspective. I think many of us have been doing that, especially in the beginning before MNS, but now after years of gliding with ease in the backlink submitter world, it's now time to get back to our roots so to speak.

I'm looking for a tool now (don't know if it exists) that will analyze any given niche and give back ranking factors of a site (domain age, indexed pages, etc) as well as a topology overview of that niche and who ranks for what major keywords. Then the tool can also analyze rich content media if it exists on a site, where it outlinks to, etc.

If we know the family tree structure of an entity, we can start to breakdown WHERE we can fit our sites into the mix. There may be a weak site sitting at number 2 that is only sitting there due to domain age, but given the other factors if you can structure your site to build out more entity information to supplant and overtake that site, then Google will throw you in due to what you are contributing to the over family tree of that niche/subject

I have an eCommerce site that was kicked badly by the penguin.

Kinda related to this; a few days back I was looking for some hard drive recovery programs. Google gave me the run around, giving me loads of info about the nature of the problems and the programs. It also gave me a few developer sites for these types of programs.

I then went to Bing. Here I got instant help, the third result was a list of 5 free programs.

There's certainly a difference there. Google is providing information/knowledge, Bing is providing solutions/actions.

I'm thinking of setting up a new authority (information/knowledge) site with all the media content you mention cody, and then selling my eCommerce products from there.

Not a bad idea, or, have the authority site act as a direct feed for the ecommerce site. I've got a situation where I have 2 clients, one a realtor and another a pet sitter..i'm trying to clue in on keys why other local sites are ranking higher in this new era..this is where the fun will come in because obviously Google doesn't have all of it its entities fleshed out yet and they're probably relying on existing data in the Google Index to build out the family tree of sites. I think there will be a bit of challenge to build an authority like site for a service or product.

G00gle is very thirsty for "new and human" information to try to make their stucture of the web more relevant. They have allready laid out a basic structure but it's missing the "human connections". That's why they are so desperate to get g00gle+ going. It will tell them what people like, talk about, represent, praise, like, want, desire, look for ... I have even seen a g00gle commercial on the Brazilian television last night for g00gle+ , never tought that that would happen ...

What's funny is that all those big online companies are sitting on so much information and knowledge, but most of them are to selfish or greedy to try to share this information (that they got of us for free in the first place) to make the perfect search engine. Search engines are getting smarter by the day but they are just machines who need humans to feed them ...

Like you have said, we have to try to give g00gle the missing links to further build out their family trees. I think we have to change our line of thinking in the post panda and penguin online world.
G00gle wants new information so we have to try to play a little by their rules. You could set up an white had authority site and still have subpages for CPA, adsense, affiliates .... You just have to find a way to tell g00gle that you are the expert and authority in that field by trying to let them see them a connection between you and others. Setting up simple and isolated landingpages doesn't do the trick anymore ...

Look at tipadviser, they way i look at it it's a blackhat site with a white had cover, it does lot's of things that we do like reviews, affiliate links, adsense, free widgets with keyword-rich deep links ... hell they even leave the door wide open to abuse the review system for blackhat techniques and still they are one of the authority site in the travel industry (G00gle has to love their adsense budget lol!).

What i found interesting to read in one of those links that you passed, is that g00gle is also betting on the flight travel industry, and they are right, there's no big player on the market for that yet, no authority! Something to watch out for!