Auto Bracketing

2019-03-21 Auto-bracketing is not a good idea because if you generate a lot of low-quality links, they will be suggested only by garbage and “making a house into a garbage dump” will occur. It is true that keyword extraction on each page and making it into a link would be a disaster. But that is a problem of “low quality,” not of automation. What is quality of links?

Consider a bad example

• For example, let’s say each page of a book is a Scrapbox page.
  • If a certain keyword X appears 100 times, it’s not appropriate to make it a link all the time.
    • 
    • If you see a hundred links, it’s just “Wow, that’s a lot of links.
    • Then it would still be better to present only the information, “You will find that keyword in book A.
    • This is Examples of unexpected discoveries in searches.
      • A keyword is unexpectedly presented as being included in a certain book and feels valuable
      • You can open the book and search again to see which specific page in the book it is on.
    • There is no straightforward way to achieve this on Scrapbox.
      • For example, if each page has a “book ID (name or ISBN)”, you can use the ID and a set of keywords to narrow down the search within a book.
      • If we try to achieve this with a link, we would need a link that expresses “the occurrence of keyword X in book A”.

Narrow links are useful

• In other words, “links that appear infrequently in other text” are useful

  • On the other hand, my most linked in Scrapbox is the KJ method and the Engineer's Intellectual Production Method.
    • Words related to the content of interest are naturally frequent.
    • The dilemma of choosing something that simply appears infrequently is to choose something that is “uninteresting”.

• Similar concept to [IDF

  • If all links are equivalent, then it is a function of IDF
    • In fact, the links are not equivalent.
      • The same “five times” but these are different in usefulness.
      • 

• Links between distant objects are beneficial.

  • So there is “near” and “far” as a relationship between pages

    • How is this defined?
      • Page proximity

  • What is Page proximity?

  • Pages belonging to the same chapter are close pages

    • This should give the chapter structure as metadata

  • Pages belonging to the same author’s book are close pages

  • Book > Chapter > Section … Hierarchical Structure

  • When the lower structure contains keywords, the upper structure also contains keywords.

    • This has a pooling feel to it.
    • Hierarchical structure is a good fit for Given
      • A keyword that appears five times in the same book is different from a keyword that appears five times in the same chapter or five times across chapters.
        • pooling Then the former would be one time and the latter five times.
      • Higher IDFs in higher tiers are more valuable.

  • What if the hierarchical structure is not Given?

    • Assuming a book, adjacent pages are close pages
    • Pages with similar content (= many keywords in common) are close pages
    • Hierarchical structures can be created by Agglomerative Hierarchical Clustering.

- [[Proximity is determined by search]] Can't you?
- [[nodal point of thought 2019-02-18#5c6a9ccfaff09e00004ee473|5c6a9ccfaff09e00004ee473]] as it relates to

• Bonus if the link already exists in Scrapbox

• I want it to be able to run incrementally.

• I hope it can be improved incrementally.

  • Nodes of Thought2019-03-21

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/自動ブラケティング using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.