Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Search Technology Created for Free Republic
FR Exclusive | 2/23/2005 | Dave Taylor

Posted on 02/23/2005 12:16:01 PM PST by Technocrat

I have created a new search technology that will make it much easier to find related articles and avoid duplicates. It is NOT keyword-based - instead, it uses sense and context to determine what an article is actually about, both in major and minor themes. I had about 500 FR articles lying around, so I shoved them into the indexer to see how well it would do, and the results are noteworthy :)

Some notes - everything is in lower case, to speed indexing. No content is actually stored in the database except the title, URL, and a 250 character snippet of internal text - instead, semantic compression reduces the entire contents of the article and first three replies to a 150-dimensional vector in domainspace. As a result, comparisons are blindingly fast (although initial indexing takes about a half second on my creaky old 1999 box) Also, I can't automatically retrieve text from FR to respect the robots policy, so for now, you have to copy and paste it from articles you want to match.

When you run a new article into the engine for comparison, its domain fingerprint is taken and stored for future comparisons. You get to see what that fingerprint is, and then you get three tiers of results: full matches, partial matches, and peripheral matches. Full matches will contain duplicates, articles about the same thing from different sources, and occasionally different articles about very similar things. For fun, you can press the back button and delete or change some text, submit it again, and see how much change it takes for your original submission to drop out of the Primary Match tier. (Don't change the URL, so it doesn't get inserted into the DB again) Secondary or partial matches contain closely related articles (although you may see a few of these in Tertiary or peripheral matches, especially the first few entries). The number in parenthesis is the match cost, or how far away the given reference is from the one you submitted in terms of domain space.

Tertiary matches let you go on a random walk through domain space. Sure, there's some definite relation to what you posted, but you will definitely be venturing afield in much of the linked article. If you want to see a really good example that works well against the current database, post the text from to the search engine.

You can try it by going here (or better yet, open a new browser window and point it at http://www.neurogy.com/sense/compare.html so you can copy and paste articles from this side to see similar articles that are already in my database.

Since this is something completely different, please post requests for format and capability, and I'll see what I can do.

Jim and John, once you see this, feel free to use it forever - I didn't have enough cash to contribute in the last fundraiser :( You can look at my previous donation history to get contact information if you want. I can provide you with simple CGI interface calls to make this part of the posting process, to show posters potential duplicates before they post. If you want to index a significant portion of the recent articles, let me know and I'll make it easier.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: donotduplicate; fr; search
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

1 posted on 02/23/2005 12:16:02 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Oops - forgot the good example URL. Try http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1319996/posts


2 posted on 02/23/2005 12:17:58 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat; John Robinson; scripter

Bump & Ping


3 posted on 02/23/2005 12:21:26 PM PST by EdReform (Free Republic - helping to keep our country a free republic. Thank you for your financial support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
Maybe they'll incorporate your technology into the Post Article process, and we will no longer have to put up with duplicates and the replies about searching to avoid duplicates!

;O)

4 posted on 02/23/2005 12:22:58 PM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
I didn't have enough cash to contribute in the last fundraiser :

Thanks to you and every FReeper who helps in one way or another.

5 posted on 02/23/2005 12:24:12 PM PST by Drango (NPR/PBS is the propaganda wing of the DNC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

That's the idea - they could add a call to the indexer to check on zero (or low) match cost primary tier hits, and if any come up, they could add a "is this a duplicate" box.


6 posted on 02/23/2005 12:24:58 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Awesome. While you're at it, add a date range filter. Also, can you set up a search engine for replies, as well-- using text from the reply or author (screenname) or date range or all or some of those (like they have at other message boards)?


7 posted on 02/23/2005 12:25:53 PM PST by GraniteStateConservative (...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Kudos to you sir!


8 posted on 02/23/2005 12:27:43 PM PST by 4CJ (Laissez les bon FReeps rouler - "Accurately quoting Lincoln is a bannable offense.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
I just knew it would only be a matter of time before someone figured out how to do this. I simply miscalculated in thinking it would have been John Robinson. ;)
9 posted on 02/23/2005 12:28:17 PM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative; Technocrat
Hey, hey - let's let the guy bask in the spotlight for a few minutes before adding new features on him ;)
10 posted on 02/23/2005 12:28:23 PM PST by general_re ("Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith, but in doubt." - Reinhold Niebuhr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative

Date range - no problem. The replies might be more problematic, as this is a sense-based engine and the entire article with replies gets shrunk down to 150 bytes or so (that's what makes it so stinking fast). Although, if John feels like integrating, I could extend it to do searches like "where did member X post about subject Y?"


11 posted on 02/23/2005 12:30:13 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but this is an Alpha engine, and I bet we'll find a lot of holes in it before everyone is happy. That's OK - I needed something to do in the evenings anyway :)


12 posted on 02/23/2005 12:32:13 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Fascinating


13 posted on 02/23/2005 12:38:16 PM PST by RightWhale (Please correct if cosmic balance requires.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
I submitted this...
Article Title: Canseco's lack of remorse for steroid use damages kids

Article URL: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/features/3052472

Article Text: This week I tallied up the number of years I've spent on or near a baseball field. Nineteen. ADVERTISEMENT Yep, for almost two decades I've sat in the bleachers, by the dugout or on the sidelines to watch one of my five kids play the Great American Pastime. I figure that, with my youngest at 11, I probably have five or more good seasons left in me before I retire. Which makes me, if not an expert in the game, at least a knowledgeable observer. In other words, I can — with some authority — tell my son he's hitting the ball late. I can also counsel from personal experience that losing 13-zip is not the end of the world. Like most parents of sports-obsessed children, I've survived the wax and wane of major-league dreams. At some point in his Little League career, each of my four sons thought he would one day make it to the pros.

...and got this back (I wonder if you can trap this and provide a layman's explanation) ...

CGI Error

The specified CGI application misbehaved by not returning a complete set of HTTP headers. The headers it did return are:
(That's all I got back. Are you checking for the minimum 1000 characters?)
14 posted on 02/23/2005 12:39:08 PM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

I expect to see the /posts on the end of the url and right now it will freak out if you try to post anything that isn't on Free Republic (mainly because of a naming convention I used to cut some corners in the initial test). I can change that tonight so you can post from anywhere.


15 posted on 02/23/2005 12:44:02 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Wow. Will try this later. Thank you.


16 posted on 02/23/2005 12:47:27 PM PST by andyandval
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Suggestion: Put the 'Submit Article' button at the top of the big text box so that I don't have to scroll all the way to the bottom of the page just to click the button (assuming I don't know or neglected to paste the article text first and save the title or URL 'til last, in which case I can just hit the Enter key to submit the form).


17 posted on 02/23/2005 12:54:06 PM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
"150-dimensional vector in domainspace"

I followed you up to there. I can guess, but better not. What’s that mean?

18 posted on 02/23/2005 12:54:09 PM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Also, the more text you post, the better your results will be (higher domain dimensionality)


19 posted on 02/23/2005 12:55:14 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

If there were a way to search around dates, or between a date range, that would help.

That is a failing of most major search engines I've tried--no way to date search. Most show the most recent dated articles. But when researching, many times I want matches older than today, or last month, or even last year. To get to the older matches, one has to wade through mounds of the latest date.


20 posted on 02/23/2005 12:58:58 PM PST by TomGuy (America: Best friend or worst enemy. Choose wisely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
"where did member X post about subject Y?"

I've often thought it would be useful to see a comprehensive listing of posts between members X and X1 (e.g. is this the freeper who told me to get lost a few months ago?). ;O)

21 posted on 02/23/2005 12:58:58 PM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
Very cool. BTT.
22 posted on 02/23/2005 12:59:46 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
The set of topics and assertions made at FR could be considered as a semantic space. You can "subdivide" (bad word) any semantic space into domains, and reference a position in semantic space as a vector comprised of measures of membership to any of those domains. If you have two different assertion trees that get you to the same spot in your defined space, just add another dimension until the problem goes away. All you really need to do is make sure that three things are true:


23 posted on 02/23/2005 1:02:15 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
" "150-dimensional vector in domainspace""

Does that mean that 150 string matches or match failures are recorded as a fingerprint?

24 posted on 02/23/2005 1:03:35 PM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

nice donation


25 posted on 02/23/2005 1:06:58 PM PST by stainlessbanner (Let's all pray for HenryLee II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

That’s beyond me. I’d have to invest some time to really follow it. Thanks though.


26 posted on 02/23/2005 1:07:46 PM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: elfman2

No - this is much more complicated than simple string matching. A domain is comprised of concepts, concepts are activated by assertions, assertions are probablistically activated by words, phrases, and other things. What I did for this search engine was to factor a generalized model into a "best fit" situation for this particular site, based on some semantic analysis I did on the 500 articles I grabbed (although it looks like we are up to 508 now). That way, I could run it in realistic time and not lose too much of the advantage of the general model.


27 posted on 02/23/2005 1:08:20 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner

Thanks! It was more fun than it should have been :)


28 posted on 02/23/2005 1:11:35 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

I think the admin would like to know about this. Give him a mail and he might add the link to it.


29 posted on 02/23/2005 1:13:30 PM PST by Wiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wiz

Before I do that, let me add some of the features that people have requested here and a few more ideas I have had and then we'll go whole hog on it.


30 posted on 02/23/2005 1:15:02 PM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Hasn't this already been posted? LOL


31 posted on 02/23/2005 1:23:47 PM PST by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
Also, the more text you post, the better your results will be

Certain of our FRiends around here seem to agree. I tend to think they're wrong, though. {grin}

32 posted on 02/23/2005 2:05:51 PM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Nick Danger

ping


33 posted on 02/23/2005 2:08:41 PM PST by Interesting Times (ABCNNBCBS -- yesterday's news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk
Hasn't this already been posted? LOL

Don't laugh. In fact, it was already posted here.

34 posted on 02/23/2005 2:18:24 PM PST by newgeezer (When encryption is outlawed, rwei qtjske ud alsx zkjwejruc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Thank you!


35 posted on 02/23/2005 3:24:22 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alia; newgeezer; fish hawk; Interesting Times; Nick Danger; Wiz; stainlessbanner; elfman2; ...

All requested bug fixes and feature upgrades are now complete, except the ability to index replies to articles (needs tighter integration from John Robinson to make that a reality). Let's break it again!


36 posted on 02/24/2005 8:32:47 AM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
Errr, why are the results related to groundhogs or Groundhog Day? I put in two current articles:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1350015/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1350121/posts

...and both of them returned this kind of thing:

Primary Matches: (strong match on most subjects, match cost under 10 is duplicate) (Groundhog Day? Here's another article on Punxsutawney Phil.)
Secondary Matches: (significant shared subject matter) (Groundhog Day? Here's an article on rodent-centered holidays in India.)
Tertiary Matches: (somewhat related on one or two points) (Groundhog Day? Here's some articles on weather, and some groundhog recipes.)

It's nice, but I'm not sure the world needs a search engine devoted to groundhogs ;)

37 posted on 02/24/2005 8:46:56 AM PST by general_re ("Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith, but in doubt." - Reinhold Niebuhr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
All requested bug fixes and feature upgrades are now complete

I ran this...

Article Title: The War Against World War IV
Article URL: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article.asp?aid=11902025_1
Article Text The War Against World War IV Norman Podhoretz A Second-Term Retreat? Will George W. Bush spend the next few years backing down from the ambitious strategy he outlined in the Bush Doctrine for fighting and winning World War IV? To be sure, Bush himself still calls it the "war on terrorism," and has shied away from giving the name World War IV to the great conflict into which we were plunged by 9/11. (World War III, in this accounting, was the cold war.) Yet he has never hesitated to compare the fight against radical Islamism, and the forces nurturing and arming it, with those earlier struggles against Nazism and Communism. Nor has he flinched from suggesting that achieving victory as the Bush Doctrine defines it may take as long as it took to win World War III (which lasted more than four decades—from the promulgation of the Truman Doctrine in 1947 until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989). Even more than the Truman Doctrine in its time, the Bush Doctrine was subjected to a ferocious assault by domestic opponents from the moment it was enunciated. Then, when Bush actually started acting on it, the ferocity grew even more intense, finally reaching record levels of vituperation during the presidential campaign. But in defiance of everything that was being thrown at him, and in spite of setbacks in Iraq that posed a serious threat to his reelection, Bush never yielded an inch. Instead of scurrying for protective cover from the assault, he stood out in the open and countered by reaffirming his belief in the soundness of the doctrine as well as his firm intention to stick with it in the years ahead. Thus, over and over again he said that he would stay the course in Iraq; that he would go on working for the spread of liberty throughout the greater Middle East (and democratic reform as a condition for the establishment of a Palestinian state); that he would continue reserving the right to take preemptive military action against what in his best judgment were gathering dangers to the security of this country; and that he would if necessary do so unilaterally. Why then, given that he was reelected on this pledge, should a question now be raised about whether he will keep it? And why—more strangely still—should the answer most often be that he is indeed about to renege? Because, comes the response, whether he likes it or not, and whether he intends to or not, he will simply have no other choice. Either his resolve will be sapped by the knowledge that he lacks the necessary political support to push any further ahead with the Bush Doctrine; or he will be prevented by a certain "law" of democratic politics governing Presidents who win a second term; or he will (as Irving Kristol famously said of liberals who turned into neoconservatives) be mugged by reality. War and Moral Values The notion that the Bush Doctrine lacks solid political backing derives from the widely publicized National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll. According to this poll, more voters (22 percent of the sample) were motivated primarily by a concern with moral values than by anything else, and it was among these voters that Bush did best against his Democratic opponent John F. Kerry; and while he also won overwhelmingly among the smaller group (19 percent) who were mainly worried about terrorism, he lost by a correspondingly large margin with the still smaller proportion (15 percent) who chose Iraq as their paramount concern. Not surprisingly, the President’s liberal opponents have interpreted this poll to mean that the election did not constitute a ratification of the Bush Doctrine. This is why they have been only too happy to second the claim pressed by spokesmen for various groups on the religious Right that Bush won because of the "faith factor" and the mobilization of the faithful around "family issues, including marriage [and] life." As it happens, a few commentators associated with the religious Right are themselves opposed to the Bush Doctrine, which gives them, too, an incentive for minimizing its role in the President’s victory. But even those religious conservatives who support the Bush Doctrine have inadvertently played into the hands of his antagonists, both domestic and foreign. That is, by claiming the lion’s share of credit for November 2, they have made it a little easier for the antiwar forces to deny that the election held on that day was a referendum on the Bush Doctrine, and that it has the wind of a solid majority of the American people behind it. Yet for all its intensity, this entire debate over the relative importance of moral values and the Bush Doctrine may stem from a complete misreading of the polls. For it is not in the least self-evident that the vague category of moral values was taken by the people who participated in the NEP survey merely as embracing abortion and gay marriage alone. On the contrary: in all probability they understood it more broadly to mean the traditionalist culture in general.
... and it yielded a result that I don't begin to understand (I didn't see the duplicate article). However, when I submitted the same thing a second time, I saw the duplicate article (only 1) with a '(0)' at the top of the Primary matches. I suppose it's possible I simply didn't notice it the first time. Perhaps if you'll give me another example article, I can run the original source through your tool.

Regardless, if your example WW IV article actually appears twice on FR, shouldn't it have appeared twice in the results?

38 posted on 02/24/2005 8:48:56 AM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Alia; newgeezer; fish hawk; Interesting Times; Nick Danger; Wiz; stainlessbanner; elfman2; ...

All requested bug fixes and feature upgrades are now complete, except the ability to index replies to articles (needs tighter integration from John Robinson to make that a reality). Let's break it again!


39 posted on 02/24/2005 8:58:06 AM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: general_re

That's just an example of the relative relevance, and you'll see that every time you do a search. Actually, the word "groundhog" is domain-neutral for this site, so it wouldn't help in a search anyway :)


40 posted on 02/24/2005 8:59:52 AM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Now, if you could find a way to eliminate those pesky duplicate REPLIES, ... ;O)


41 posted on 02/24/2005 9:00:34 AM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
It sounds like something that would be great, but as for me, well...


42 posted on 02/24/2005 9:01:41 AM PST by Petronski (Zebras: Free Range Bar Codes of the Serengeti)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat

Ah. Anyway, it didn't return any primary or secondary matches at all, and the tertiary matches were pretty weak, which I suppose is to be expected - I assume this is a problem that will resolve itself as the indexes expand, though.


43 posted on 02/24/2005 9:04:20 AM PST by general_re ("Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith, but in doubt." - Reinhold Niebuhr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

That's right! The article you posted was one that I inserted to the search engine earlier, and provided earlier in this thread as a good example of how you can get related results because the domain set of that article was so rich. Now I indexed the entire source of the article, which was quite extensive compared to the piece you posted, so you will probably see the original copy in the secondary match list.

The fact that you got a 0 match cost on the primary tier means that the engine thinks it has a precise duplicate of something already in the engine (which it does, since you tried to insert it twice).

Unfortunately, I haven't indexed all of FR on this server, because I would need permission from the mighty ones to do that. So far I have a deafening silence, and I'm not quite sure what to do about that.


44 posted on 02/24/2005 9:04:24 AM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Ouch. Really. Ouch. :)


45 posted on 02/24/2005 9:05:08 AM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Hmmm. I just did exactly the same thing, and the original article (which has a maximum magnitude of over 150) doesn't even appear in the list. I may need to change this so the first paragraphs are indexed the strongest, and succeeding paragraphs are done with less and less emphasis. Another project for this afternoon!


46 posted on 02/24/2005 9:09:02 AM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: general_re

Yes - it would be really cool if we could get permission to get the last 100,000 articles in the DB. I'll work on that once I feel like the quality is up to snuff.


47 posted on 02/24/2005 9:10:24 AM PST by Technocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
So far I have a deafening silence, and I'm not quite sure what to do about that.

Perhaps you should email Jim and John privately - make it clear that you're willing to sign over your code to them gratis (assuming you're willing to do that, of course), and that the code is in fact your own original work that you are free to give to them. And then wait, I guess.

Anyway, for all we know, John was three days away from deploying his own search engine, so this isn't really useful to them. Or perhaps there are legal issues that they need to check out before accepting it from you. Who knows? In any case, it seems likely to me that even if da boss couldn't use this for some reason, he'd let you know rather than just leave you hanging....

48 posted on 02/24/2005 9:13:28 AM PST by general_re ("Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith, but in doubt." - Reinhold Niebuhr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
I may need to change this so the first paragraphs are indexed the strongest

I've always envisioned the 'perfect duplicate-avoiding FR search algorithm' would do exactly that. In fact, I'd have it look for phrase matches (e.g. words 1 thru 6, 2 thru 7, 3 thru 8, etc.) and only looking at first 100 or so words. Seems like that'd expose any potential duplicates for sure. But, my thoughts were always centered on duplicates avoidance, never on finding loosely-related articles.

49 posted on 02/24/2005 9:14:36 AM PST by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
Maybe I am confused as to the purpose of this.

I submitted and got a nice list of terms with numbers of appearances.

So....

None of the results had any links, nor article titles, ... nothing other than a list of terms followed by numbers.

===

Similar Article Analysis Results

Number of articles in database: 517

Domain fingerprint:
--------------------------------
Central domains
--------------------------------
Middle East 10
medical 8
organization - people 5
--------------------------------
Peripheral Domains:
--------------------------------
military 3
finance/economy 2
government 2
law/truth 2
process 2
travel 2
Africa 2
Iraq 2
education 1
factory 1
flaws 1
information 1
books/mags/print media 1
physics 1
politics/elections 1
relationship 1
science 1
sports 1
Western US 1
Primary Matches: (strong match on most subjects, match cost under 10 is duplicate) (Groundhog Day? Here's another article on Punxsutawney Phil.)
Secondary Matches: (significant shared subject matter) (Groundhog Day? Here's an article on rodent-centered holidays in India.)
Tertiary Matches: (somewhat related on one or two points) (Groundhog Day? Here's some articles on weather, and some groundhog recipes.)



Also, the results are about Groundhog Day and Punxsutawney Phil????

The article I submitted is: Idi Amin is overweight
50 posted on 02/24/2005 9:52:59 AM PST by TomGuy (America: Best friend or worst enemy. Choose wisely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson