Google APis support specifying the type to search for - https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/places/web-service/supported_types
Using Python or any other programatic language, is it possible to enumerate all the restaurants in entire UK? What kind of pricing costs will be incurred for using Google Places API to do this?
Thanks
Having to go down to a very fine zoom level in order approximately get most restaurants, you'd have two problems:
it's going to be HUGELY expensive
and more importantly: it's against their policies (https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/places/web-service/policies):
Pre-Fetching, Caching, or Storage of Content Applications using the
Places API are bound by the Google Maps Platform Terms of Service.
Section 3.2.3(a) and (b) of the terms states that you must not
pre-fetch, index, store, or cache any Content except under the limited
conditions stated in the terms.
Related
I am working on a project related to travel, for which I need an API that can provide me popular tourist destinations / things to do (activities) / restaurants in an area or near me.
The Google Nearby Places seemed exact fit for this scenario, but when I started working with it, I found it bloated with data, which I don't need and cant filter out.
As an example, it lists banks with types such as Point of Interest and Establishment. There's nothing that differentiates a beach with Banks other than bank type, which a bank is also tagged with.
Google has types of places listed here, but none satisfies what I need.
The type of data I am looking for is places popular with tourists, restaurants and activities that are available at a particular spot. So, for example the data I am looking for is something like:
In a town called Gokarna, we have say A, B, C beaches which are popular among tourists. At A, things that can be done are kayaking and surfing. The famous restaurants available nearby are X, Y, Z. And if possible user reviews.
Can you please suggest me an API that can, if not all, fullfill most of what I am looking for?
I have also gone through foursquare API, and it also seems promising but the issue with it is for working with their places data, we need to register as an enterprise user, which a single developer cannot afford. So a suggestion for cost effective alternative will be of great help.
I would look at Here Maps and their APIs. They have good developer support and only focus on mapping and geographic related things
I could not find anything which provides the functionality that I want online. The only thing I could think of so far is using the text_search with different location types (e.g. schools, parks, ...) I was wondering if there is an easier way for this.
I also tried using the open street map but the locations that I get are mostly roads and residential areas names.
This is not exactly possible. Generally speaking, the Google Maps APIs are not intended to be used as databases for obtaining exhaustive lists of anything.
The closest you can do is Places API Nearby Search with rankby=distance and different type values. This is limited to the nearest 60 results.
I am using the Google Places API to retrieve all the POI (Places of Interest) around a the current location, it works ok but I have noticed that whatever the value of the radius is, I always get the same number of results (~ 20). As a result, if I give a radius that is too big, I don't necessarily get the nearest POIs. If I reduce the amount of the radius to be small enough, I will retrieve those nearest places again (from experimentation, I have noticed that 100 meters is a proper value) but that means that I will not get any POIs beyond 100 meters which is not quite what I want.
My question is: is there any way by which I can get all the POIs (with no limitations) within a certain radius.
Thank you!
The Google Places API always returns 20 results by design, selecting the 20 results that best fit the criteria you define in your request. The Developer's Guide / Docs don't explicitly cite that number anywhere that I have seen. I learned about the limit watching the Autocomplete Demo & Places API Demo & Discussion Video, given by Paul Saxman, a Developer Advocate at Google and Marcelo Camelo, Google's Technical Lead for the Places API.
The entire video is worth watching, but more specific to your question, if you set the playback timer at about 11:50, Marcelo Camelo is contrasting the Autocomplete tool versus the general Places API, and that's the portion of the video where he mentions the 20 result limit. He mentions 20 as the standard result count several times.
There are many other good Places API and Google Maps videos linked to that area on YouTube as well.
As mentioned on the Google Places Issue Tracker here: http://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/issues/detail?id=3425
We are restricted by our data provider licenses to enable apps to display no more than 20 places results at a time. Consequently we are not able to increase this limit at this time.
It does sound like you are however trying to return results that are closest to a specified location, this is now possible by using the 'rankby=distance' parameter instead of 'radius' in your request.
e.g.
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/place/search/json?location=-33.8670522,151.1957362&rankby=distance&types=food&name=harbour&sensor=false&key=YOUR_API_KEY
Try google.maps.places.RankBy.DISTANCE; as default is google.maps.places.RankBy.PROMINENCE;
An easy example of this is shown Here
(Chrome only)
What technology goes in behind the screens of Amazon recommendation technology? I believe that Amazon recommendation is currently the best in the market, but how do they provide us with such relevant recommendations?
Recently, we have been involved with similar recommendation kind of project, but would surely like to know about the in and outs of the Amazon recommendation technology from a technical standpoint.
Any inputs would be highly appreciated.
Update:
This patent explains how personalized recommendations are done but it is not very technical, and so it would be really nice if some insights could be provided.
From the comments of Dave, Affinity Analysis forms the basis for such kind of Recommendation Engines. Also here are some good reads on the Topic
Demystifying Market Basket Analysis
Market Basket Analysis
Affinity Analysis
Suggested Reading:
Data Mining: Concepts and Technique
It is both an art and a science. Typical fields of study revolve around market basket analysis (also called affinity analysis) which is a subset of the field of data mining. Typical components in such a system include identification of primary driver items and the identification of affinity items (accessory upsell, cross sell).
Keep in mind the data sources they have to mine...
Purchased shopping carts = real money from real people spent on real items = powerful data and a lot of it.
Items added to carts but abandoned.
Pricing experiments online (A/B testing, etc.) where they offer the same products at different prices and see the results
Packaging experiments (A/B testing, etc.) where they offer different products in different "bundles" or discount various pairings of items
Wishlists - what's on them specifically for you - and in aggregate it can be treated similarly to another stream of basket analysis data
Referral sites (identification of where you came in from can hint other items of interest)
Dwell times (how long before you click back and pick a different item)
Ratings by you or those in your social network/buying circles - if you rate things you like you get more of what you like and if you confirm with the "i already own it" button they create a very complete profile of you
Demographic information (your shipping address, etc.) - they know what is popular in your general area for your kids, yourself, your spouse, etc.
user segmentation = did you buy 3 books in separate months for a toddler? likely have a kid or more.. etc.
Direct marketing click through data - did you get an email from them and click through? They know which email it was and what you clicked through on and whether you bought it as a result.
Click paths in session - what did you view regardless of whether it went in your cart
Number of times viewed an item before final purchase
If you're dealing with a brick and mortar store they might have your physical purchase history to go off of as well (i.e. toys r us or something that is online and also a physical store)
etc. etc. etc.
Luckily people behave similarly in aggregate so the more they know about the buying population at large the better they know what will and won't sell and with every transaction and every rating/wishlist add/browse they know how to more personally tailor recommendations. Keep in mind this is likely only a small sample of the full set of influences of what ends up in recommendations, etc.
Now I have no inside knowledge of how Amazon does business (never worked there) and all I'm doing is talking about classical approaches to the problem of online commerce - I used to be the PM who worked on data mining and analytics for the Microsoft product called Commerce Server. We shipped in Commerce Server the tools that allowed people to build sites with similar capabilities.... but the bigger the sales volume the better the data the better the model - and Amazon is BIG. I can only imagine how fun it is to play with models with that much data in a commerce driven site. Now many of those algorithms (like the predictor that started out in commerce server) have moved on to live directly within Microsoft SQL.
The four big take-a-ways you should have are:
Amazon (or any retailer) is looking at aggregate data for tons of transactions and tons of people... this allows them to even recommend pretty well for anonymous users on their site.
Amazon (or any sophisticated retailer) is keeping track of behavior and purchases of anyone that is logged in and using that to further refine on top of the mass aggregate data.
Often there is a means of over riding the accumulated data and taking "editorial" control of suggestions for product managers of specific lines (like some person who owns the 'digital cameras' vertical or the 'romance novels' vertical or similar) where they truly are experts
There are often promotional deals (i.e. sony or panasonic or nikon or canon or sprint or verizon pays additional money to the retailer, or gives a better discount at larger quantities or other things in those lines) that will cause certain "suggestions" to rise to the top more often than others - there is always some reasonable business logic and business reason behind this targeted at making more on each transaction or reducing wholesale costs, etc.
In terms of actual implementation? Just about all large online systems boil down to some set of pipelines (or a filter pattern implementation or a workflow, etc. you call it what you will) that allow for a context to be evaluated by a series of modules that apply some form of business logic.
Typically a different pipeline would be associated with each separate task on the page - you might have one that does recommended "packages/upsells" (i.e. buy this with the item you're looking at) and one that does "alternatives" (i.e. buy this instead of the thing you're looking at) and another that pulls items most closely related from your wish list (by product category or similar).
The results of these pipelines are able to be placed on various parts of the page (above the scroll bar, below the scroll, on the left, on the right, different fonts, different size images, etc.) and tested to see which perform best. Since you're using nice easy to plug and play modules that define the business logic for these pipelines you end up with the moral equivalent of lego blocks that make it easy to pick and choose from the business logic you want applied when you build another pipeline which allows faster innovation, more experimentation, and in the end higher profits.
Did that help at all? Hope that give you a little bit of insight how this works in general for just about any ecommerce site - not just Amazon. Amazon (from talking to friends that have worked there) is very data driven and continually measures the effectiveness of it's user experience and the pricing, promotion, packaging, etc. - they are a very sophisticated retailer online and are likely at the leading edge of a lot of the algorithms they use to optimize profit - and those are likely proprietary secrets (you know like the formula to KFC's secret spices) and guaarded as such.
This isn't directly related to Amazon's recommendation system, but it might be helpful to study the methods used by people who competed in the Netflix Prize, a contest to develop a better recommendation system using Netflix user data. A lot of good information exists in their community about data mining techniques in general.
The team that won used a blend of the recommendations generated by a lot of different models/techniques. I know that some of the main methods used were principal component analysis, nearest neighbor methods, and neural networks. Here are some papers by the winning team:
R. Bell, Y. Koren, C. Volinsky, "The BellKor 2008 Solution to the Netflix Prize", (2008).
A. Töscher, M. Jahrer, “The BigChaos Solution to the Netflix Prize 2008", (2008).
A. Töscher, M. Jahrer, R. Legenstein, "Improved Neighborhood-Based Algorithms for Large-Scale Recommender Systems", SIGKDD Workshop on Large-Scale Recommender Systems and the Netflix Prize Competition (KDD’08) , ACM Press (2008).
Y. Koren, "The BellKor Solution to the Netflix Grand Prize", (2009).
A. Töscher, M. Jahrer, R. Bell, "The BigChaos Solution to the Netflix Grand Prize", (2009).
M. Piotte, M. Chabbert, "The Pragmatic Theory solution to the Netflix Grand Prize", (2009).
The 2008 papers are from the first year's Progress Prize. I recommend reading the earlier ones first because the later ones build upon the previous work.
I bumped on this paper today:
Amazon.com Recommendations: Item-to-Item Collaborative Filtering
Maybe it provides additional information.
(Disclamer: I used to work at Amazon, though I didn't work on the recommendations team.)
ewernli's answer should be the correct one -- the paper links to Amazon's original recommendation system, and from what I can tell (both from personal experience as an Amazon shopper and having worked on similar systems at other companies), very little has changed: at its core, Amazon's recommendation feature is still very heavily based on item-to-item collaborative filtering.
Just look at what form the recommendations take: on my front page, they're all either of the form "You viewed X...Customers who also viewed this also viewed...", or else a melange of items similar to things I've bought or viewed before. If I specifically go to my "Recommended for You" page, every item describes why it's recommended for me: "Recommended because you purchased...", "Recommended because you added X to your wishlist...", etc. This is a classic sign of item-to-item collaborative filtering.
So how does item-to-item collaborative filtering work? Basically, for each item, you build a "neighborhood" of related items (e.g., by looking at what items people have viewed together or what items people have bought together -- to determine similarity, you can use metrics like the Jaccard index; correlation is another possibility, though I suspect Amazon doesn't use ratings data very heavily). Then, whenever I view an item X or make a purchase Y, Amazon suggests me things in the same neighborhood as X or Y.
Some other approaches that Amazon could potentially use, but likely doesn't, are described here: http://blog.echen.me/2011/02/15/an-overview-of-item-to-item-collaborative-filtering-with-amazons-recommendation-system/
A lot of what Dave describes is almost certainly not done at Amazon. (Ratings by those in my social network? Nope, Amazon doesn't have any of my social data. This would be a massive privacy issue in any case, so it'd be tricky for Amazon to do even if they had that data: people don't want their friends to know what books or movies they're buying. Demographic information? Nope, nothing in the recommendations suggests they're looking at this. [Unlike Netflix, who does surface what other people in my area are watching.])
I don't have any knowledge of Amazon's algorithm specifically, but one component of such an algorithm would probably involve tracking groups of items frequently ordered together, and then using that data to recommend other items in the group when a customer purchases some subset of the group.
Another possibility would be to track the frequency of item B being ordered within N days after ordering item A, which could suggest a correlation.
As far I know, it's use Case-Based Reasoning as an engine for it.
You can see in this sources: here, here and here.
There are many sources in google searching for amazon and case-based reasoning.
If you want a hands-on tutorial (using open-source R) then you could do worse than going through this:
https://gist.github.com/yoshiki146/31d4a46c3d8e906c3cd24f425568d34e
It is a run-time optimised version of another piece of work:
http://www.salemmarafi.com/code/collaborative-filtering-r/
However, the variation of the code on the first link runs MUCH faster so I recommend using that (I found the only slow part of yoshiki146's code is the final routine which generates the recommendation at user level - it took about an hour with my data on my machine).
I adapted this code to work as a recommendation engine for the retailer I work for.
The algorithm used is - as others have said above - collaborative filtering. This method of CF calculates a cosine similarity matrix and then sorts by that similarity to find the 'nearest neighbour' for each element (music band in the example given, retail product in my application).
The resulting table can recommend a band/product based on another chosen band/product.
The next section of the code goes a step further with USER (or customer) based collaborative filtering.
The output of this is a large table with the top 100 bands/products recommended for a given user/customer
Someone did a presentation at our University on something similar last week, and referenced the Amazon recommendation system. I believe that it uses a form of K-Means Clustering to cluster people into their different buying habits. Hope this helps :)
Check this out too: Link and as HTML.
What searching algorithm/concept is used in Google?
The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine
Indexing
If you want to get down to basics:
Google uses an inverted index of the Internet. What this means is that Google has an index of all pages it's crawled based on the terms in each page. For instance the term Google maps to this page, the Google home page, and the Wikipedia article for Google, amongst others.
Thus, when you go to Google and type "Google" into the search box, Google checks its index of all terms available on the Internet and finds the entry for the term "Google" and with it the list of all pages that have that term referenced in it.
For veteran users:
Google's index goes beyond your simple inverted index, however. This is why Google is the best. Google's crawlers (spiders) are smart. Very smart. Beyond just keeping track of the terms that are on any given web page, they also keep track of words that are on related pages and link those to the given document.
In other words, if a page has the term Google in it and the page has a link to or is linked from another web page, the other page may be referenced in the index under the term Google as well. All this and more go into why a given page is returned for a given query.
If you want to go into why pages are ordered the way they are in your search results, that gets into even more interesting stuff.
Ranking
To get down to basics:
Perhaps one of the most basic algorithms a search engine can use to sort your results is known as term frequency-inverse document frequency (tf-idf). Simply put, this means that your results will be ordered by the relative importance of your search terms in the document. In other words, a document that has 10 pages and lists the word Google once is not nearly as important as a document that has 1 page and lists the word Google ten times.
For veteran users:
Again, Google does quite a bit more than your basic search engine when it comes to ranking results. Google has implemented the aforementioned, patented, PageRank algorithm. In short form, PageRank enhances the tf-idf algorithm by taking into account the populatirty/importance of a given page. At this point, popularity/importance may be judged by any number of factors that Google just wont tell us. However, at the most basic of levels, Google can tell that one page is more important than another because loads and loads of other pages link to it.
Google's patented PigeonRank™
Wow, they initially posted this 7 years ago from Wednesday ...
PageRank is a link analysis algorithm used by Google for the search engine, but the patent was assigned to Stanford University.
I think "The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine" is a little outdated.
Hier a recent talk about scalability: Challenges in Building Large-Scale Information Retrieval Systems
Inverted index and MapReduce is the basics of most search engines (I believe). You create an index on the content and run queries against that index to display relevance. Google however does much more than just a simple index of where each word occurs, they also do how many times it appeared, where it appears, where it appears in relation to other words, the ordering, etc. Another simple concept that's used is "stop words" which may include things like "and", "the", and so on (basically "simple" words that occur often and generally not the focus of a query). In addition, they employ things like Page Rank (mentioned by TStamper) to order pages by relevance and importance.
MapReduce is basically taking one job and dividing it into smaller jobs and letting those smaller jobs run on many systems (in parts for scalability and in parts for speed). If I recall correctly, Google was able to make use of "average" computers to distribute jobs to instead of server-grade computers. Since the processing capability of one computer is reaching a peak, many technology are heading towards cloud computing where a job is done by many physical machines.
I'm not sure how much searching Google does, it's more accurately crawling. The difference lies in that they just start at specific points and crawl to anything reachable and repeat until they hit some sort of dead-end.
While being interested in the page rank algorithm and similar I was disturbed to discover that the introduction of personal search at the turn of the year (not widely commented on) seems to change quite a lot - see Failure of the Google Gold Standard and
Google’s Personalized Results
This question cannot be answered canonically. The Algorithms used by Google (and other search engines) are their closest guarded secrets and change constantly. Every correct answer can be invalid a month or a year later.
(I know this doesn't really answer the question, but that's the point, there is no possible answer.)