Path forward with Machine Learning project
Hello all,
A new version of the ML auto-suggest prototype is now available: http://tologix.devitsandbox.com/. I have a couple of issues that I've spotted with the prototype that I'll post through a separate message: Feedback on ML Auto-Suggest Search Prototype - TOLOGIX - Machine Learning. However,
Devaang
is proposing that we start looking to incorporate the following ideas/data elements into the ML model so that we have more user-centric learning and thereby produce higher accuracies:
A new version of the ML auto-suggest prototype is now available: http://tologix.devitsandbox.com/. I have a couple of issues that I've spotted with the prototype that I'll post through a separate message: Feedback on ML Auto-Suggest Search Prototype - TOLOGIX - Machine Learning. However,
- User Behaviour tracking - Log user search phrases, patterns and feed them continuously to the ML model.
- On the User Profiles, provide a mandatory ‘points of interest’ selections to each user; e.g. a user may be more interested in Arbitration, Environmental Impacts, Liabilities, etc. Then all such ‘categories’ can be provided for multi-selection. This will also then tie-in to the ML Model along with the user behaviour which enhances the pin-pointing.
- The categorization (tagging) data on the Citator can also be fed into the ML Model which can cross-reference the user interest areas, their behaviour data and of course, the main learning from the vast content.
I agree with the approach of setting up an environment that provides the necessary inputs to make the ML model more accurate. However, we can't introduce a search to subscribers unless it is 100% accurate. As a result, is it possible to setup an ML input environment to run in the background while running the new application on a search powered by dtSearch? The idea would be to have a production environment that presents users with dtSearch driven search results while collecting user search data to further develop the ML model. Eventually when we're comfortable that the ML model is producing 100% accurate results, we can replace the searches powered by dtSearch with searches powered by ML. I understand that in the long-term an ML powered search will be superior to a dtSearch powered search; however, we need to ensure that users' searches are not compromised until the ML model is fully developed.
Please let me know your thoughts and suggestions.
Savannah
, I'd be curious to here what Industrial's perspective is on this issue.
Thanks,
Morgan
Please let me know your thoughts and suggestions.
Thanks,
Morgan
For the User Behaviour tracking, I think this is a good idea would the intention to log this anonymously, and/or is this possible?
Thanks!
Ryan
Thanks,
Morgan
Could we please get your comments on the approach for the ML project above.
Thanks,
Morgan
Tracking and recording user behavior is an important aspect for the ML approach. This combined with other input elements (SME Tagging, User Interest Areas) will help in returning pin-point results to user searches. Yet, the need for user activity secrecy is paramount to maintain privacy and legal compliance. This scenario puts us in a situation where we are able to grab search strings but not able to track this back to the same user. To address this situation, we would need to construct a complex 'software' workaround (not an ML application) that would first capture and store user behavior as encrypted information which cannot be read (decoded) easily. Yet, we are still trying to determine an appropriate technical approach to address this.
On other thoughts, such a stringent 'No user tracking' condition impedes the working of the ML model and therefore accuracy. In general, all global applications actually "Ask for the User Consent" by explicitly explaining their "Privacy Policy". This covers - what type of data will be captured, how it will be stored, how it will be secured, how it will be used to provide more efficient services (in our case, this is "Searches"), etc. Such a "Consent" can be a part of the "User Profile" page where it becomes mandatory for the user to make a choice when they setup their profile information, areas of interest, etc.
We can talk more about this next Thursday (Dec 5th) maybe, 30 minutes prior to the weekly call. Do let me know what works for you and I shall do my best to accommodate.
Best
Devaang
Thank you for the note above. Why don't we setup a call next week to discuss, and then we can update the team during the call on Thursday. I have a feeling this will be a longer discussion, and I don't want it to hijack the other priority items that need discussion on Thursday. Are you and
Monday at 7:30am Vancouver time
Monday at 8:30pm Vancouver time
Tuesday at 7:00am Vancouver time
Wednesday at 7:30am Vancouver time
Let me know, and I'll send you details for the call.
Also, please note that I understand that 'no user tracking' condition impedes our ability to provide inputs for the ML, but unfortunately that is a strict constraint. Our users are performing research on highly confidential, sensitive matters and it's extremely important that we abide by the terms of our subscription agreements, which require complete anonymity to any search data inputted by the user.
Thanks,
Morgan
We can talk Wednesday, 7:30 AM Vancouver time. It gives Dhrumil and his team few more days to research other possibilities for addressing the user behaviour tracking issue.
Best
Devaang
Have a good weekend.
Morgan
Two important points to emphasize:
Thanks,
Morgan
Further to comment above, please let me know when you have the document prepared outlining the plan for integrating the ML input tools into the new ISLG application. We will be starting to shift attention to front-end searches in the New Year, and we'll want to ensure the plan is integrated into that workflow.
Thanks,
Morgan
We will submit this by tomorrow eod. As You are aware about that its a complex process and We have to finalize the steps that we have to take and decide the architecture that we have to follow so our team was planning for that and also they were study about the things that we have to implement to follow our decided approach so by tomorrow our team will be able to provide you the detailed documentation on this.
Let me know in case of any concern.
Morgan
I have submitted the document to the
Let me know in case of any concerns.
Morgan
I still haven't heard from anyone about the document above. Could you please provide me with an update. Let's move this process forward.
Thanks,
Morgan
I am working on a document which details the ‘going forward’ plan and the steps.
Hope to get this across to you tomorrow.
Best
Devaang
Morgan
Any update on the document above?
Thanks,
Morgan
Yes, I am falling behind on this one and apologize for the delay.
I was hoping to get the document across last week but I had multiple passes at it and still not satisfied with the coverage I envisaged. Dhrumil and I are meeting again tomorrow afternoon India time to finalize (hopefully !) this document. I shall update you tomorrow evening again or if the document is good then I shall just share it. We can then fix a time this week or early next to talk over it and freeze.
Thanks for your patience.
Best regards,
Devaang Bhatt | Vice President, International Business
Microsoft Specialist, MCP
Morgan