51–60 of 107 posts
What are other good areas where semantic search can be useful? I've been toying with the idea for a while to play around and make such a webapp. Some of the current ideas I had: 1. Online ads search for marketers: embed and index video + image ads, allow natural language search to find marketing inspiration. 2. Multi e-commerce platform search for shopping: find products across Sephora, zara, h&m, etc. I don't know i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unusual use case but I write literature reviews for French R&D tax cut system, and we specifically need to: focus on most recent papers, stay on topic for a very specific problematic a company has, potentially include grey literature (tech blog articles from renowned corp), be as exhaustive as possible when it comes to freely accessible papers (we are more ok with missing paid papers unless they are really popular).…
This is quite unique. I believe a custom solution might help you better than Google Scholar.
For every application of semantic search, I’d love to see what the benefit is over text search. If there a benchmark to see if it improves the search. Subjectively, did you find it surfaced new papers? Is this more useful in certain domains?
One of the factors is how users phrase their queries. On some level people are used to full text search but semantic shines when they ask literal questions with terminology that may not match the answer.
This is cool, but how about local semantic search through tens of thousands articles and books. Sure I'm not the first, there should be some tools already.
I enjoy seeing projects like this! If you expand beyond arxiv, keep in mind since coverage matters for lit reviews, unfortunately the big publishers (Elsevier and Springer) are forcing other indices like OpenAlex, etc. to remove abstracts so they're harder to get. Have you checked out other tools like undermind.ai, scite.ai, and elicit.org? You might consider what else a dedicated product workflow for lit reviews inc…
Thank you for the appreciation and great feedback! | If you expand beyond arxiv, keep in mind since coverage matters for lit reviews, I do have PaperMatchBio [^1] for bioRxiv and PaperMatchMed [^2] for medRxiv, however I do agree having multiple sites for domains isn't ideal. And I am yet to create a synchronization pipeline for these two so the results may be a little stale. | unfortunately the big publishers (Elsev…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you for the appreciation and great feedback! | If you expand beyond arxiv, keep in mind since coverage matters for lit reviews, I do have PaperMatchBio [^1] for bioRxiv and PaperMatchMed [^2] for medRxiv, however I do agree having multiple sites for domains isn't ideal. And I am yet to create a synchronization pipeline for these two so the results may be a little stale. | unfortunately the big publishers (Elsev…
Unusual use case but I write literature reviews for French R&D tax cut system, and we specifically need to: focus on most recent papers, stay on topic for a very specific problematic a company has, potentially include grey literature (tech blog articles from renowned corp), be as exhaustive as possible when it comes to freely accessible papers (we are more ok with missing paid papers unless they are really popular).…
We have users with very similar use cases to yours. Want to email me? dylan@fixpoint.co. I'm one of the founders :)
However I can give you the heads-up that the abstracts don't render well because (La)TeX is interpreted as markdown so that
Paper~1 shows something and Paper~2 shows something else