jascoken
Senior Member
- Nov 1, 2010
- 1,135
- 753
I get asked this question quite a lot, and so I thought I'd do a quick post to try and explain it to those that are new to spinning, and the math involved...
Essentially, the %unique number quoted by most software is a variable function; it's worked out differently by different software developers, and there doesn't seem to be any particular standard.
The main problem is that it doesn't incorporate any kind of permutation calculation. i.e. it doesn't tell you how MANY unique versions are available.
If you take this spun block:
{Some text|Some more text|Some different text|Some even more different text}.
...Then most spinners will give you a 100% unique rating, because 100% of it is spun! But clearly, this 100% spun 'article' would be useless for mass submission, because there are only 4 permutations (different end results).
It's the same with paragraph spinning... Take this example of 2 para's, each with 4 spins:
{Para 1|Para 2|Para 3|Para 4}.
{Para 5|Para 6|Para 7|Para 8}.
We have 100% uniqueness at article level, and 100% uniqueness at para level, but we only have 4 permutations at para level, and 4x4 = 16 permutations at article level. Still useless for mass submission!
Even if you have 6 paragraphs and have 4 versions of each, you only have 4^6 permutations (4x4x4x4x4x4) = 4,096 article permutations. BUT you still only have 4 permutations at paragraph level.
I always calculate permutations at paragraph level, because it provides a more sensible idea of 'longevity' of a spun construct. It's pointless telling yourself you've got 4096 variations in the 2nd example above, when a large percentage of these are only differing by a small amount.
It's why standard 25-50% autospins at word-level yield fairly low numbers of truly unique articles.
However...
If you created 3 extra rewrites of each sentence, and used 3 sentences per paragraph, and then braces/spintax spin each sentence into 5 chunks/parts/phrases with 4 total spins each...
...then you have nearly 69 Billion permutations of that paragraph alone (4^5 x 4 = 4096: 4096^3 = 68.7B.)
If you have 10 paragraphs, and only use 5 of them in a mixed/random order, then this number gets gigantic. To all intents and purposes, you'll be able to use it almost indefinitely. I have constructs like this that I built 5 years ago that are still going strong after a full 1-2k blast use EVERY WEEK.
It's why spinning has to take on a new face with today's SEO. I implemented this technology about 5 years ago and coined the phrase '3D Hyper Spinning' - because you're working in 3 dimensions; multiple paragraph substitution, sentence rewriting, and spintax inside sentences. I implemented this in our 'UberCubez' module ( http://www.ubertoolz.com/UberCubezCreation.html ) as many of you on BHW will know, as a lot of our members come from here.
Relying on a simple uniqueness% is very dangerous for mass submission, and could be why many members get lower indexing than they expect; simply because they haven't understood the math behind spinning. Full permutation & combination math gets extraordinarily complicated to explain, so I'm not going to get into detail on calculating the actual numbers. But hopefully this example will open the door to a basic understanding for some members.
Essentially, the %unique number quoted by most software is a variable function; it's worked out differently by different software developers, and there doesn't seem to be any particular standard.
The main problem is that it doesn't incorporate any kind of permutation calculation. i.e. it doesn't tell you how MANY unique versions are available.
If you take this spun block:
{Some text|Some more text|Some different text|Some even more different text}.
...Then most spinners will give you a 100% unique rating, because 100% of it is spun! But clearly, this 100% spun 'article' would be useless for mass submission, because there are only 4 permutations (different end results).
It's the same with paragraph spinning... Take this example of 2 para's, each with 4 spins:
{Para 1|Para 2|Para 3|Para 4}.
{Para 5|Para 6|Para 7|Para 8}.
We have 100% uniqueness at article level, and 100% uniqueness at para level, but we only have 4 permutations at para level, and 4x4 = 16 permutations at article level. Still useless for mass submission!
Even if you have 6 paragraphs and have 4 versions of each, you only have 4^6 permutations (4x4x4x4x4x4) = 4,096 article permutations. BUT you still only have 4 permutations at paragraph level.
I always calculate permutations at paragraph level, because it provides a more sensible idea of 'longevity' of a spun construct. It's pointless telling yourself you've got 4096 variations in the 2nd example above, when a large percentage of these are only differing by a small amount.
It's why standard 25-50% autospins at word-level yield fairly low numbers of truly unique articles.
However...
If you created 3 extra rewrites of each sentence, and used 3 sentences per paragraph, and then braces/spintax spin each sentence into 5 chunks/parts/phrases with 4 total spins each...
...then you have nearly 69 Billion permutations of that paragraph alone (4^5 x 4 = 4096: 4096^3 = 68.7B.)
If you have 10 paragraphs, and only use 5 of them in a mixed/random order, then this number gets gigantic. To all intents and purposes, you'll be able to use it almost indefinitely. I have constructs like this that I built 5 years ago that are still going strong after a full 1-2k blast use EVERY WEEK.
It's why spinning has to take on a new face with today's SEO. I implemented this technology about 5 years ago and coined the phrase '3D Hyper Spinning' - because you're working in 3 dimensions; multiple paragraph substitution, sentence rewriting, and spintax inside sentences. I implemented this in our 'UberCubez' module ( http://www.ubertoolz.com/UberCubezCreation.html ) as many of you on BHW will know, as a lot of our members come from here.
Relying on a simple uniqueness% is very dangerous for mass submission, and could be why many members get lower indexing than they expect; simply because they haven't understood the math behind spinning. Full permutation & combination math gets extraordinarily complicated to explain, so I'm not going to get into detail on calculating the actual numbers. But hopefully this example will open the door to a basic understanding for some members.
Last edited:
