Ubuntu QA:
BlogBrainstormPackage status
Log in
Ubuntu QA
The Ubuntu community has contributed 15328 ideas, 75068 comments, 1387413 votes

Idea #10261: Graphical Mind Mapping feature - similar to some search engines



up
4
down
Written by Tree MendUs the 25 Jun 08 at 04:14. Category: Brainstorm.
Related to: Nothing/Others. Status: New
Description
for Brainstorm.

Note this is not urgent but could be an objective to aim for in the future.

A system for automatically discovering, analysing, manipulation, and presentation of inter-relationships of concepts would be helpful in ordering much of the information generated by Brainstorming sessions.

Keywords that are in common "imply" a connection of some sort between separate documents.
But where "links or connections" are "stated or defined", there is no doubt about the connections.

These connections can be used to group data/issues/considerations/topics/factors into prominent groups, And show the overall independence or overlap between them.

The discussions comments may even be helpful to automatically detect what depends on what, and what might prevent what from happening.

Altavista search engine used to have a great system back in the late 90s, but no more. Kartoo has a good system - "try a search for "ubuntu brainstorm duplicate".

http://www.kartoo.com

Cuil search engine has a categorizer function;

http://www.cuil.com/

See how it arranges topics with contours of probabilities of topic overlap.
See the issues that are common between topics, and hover over them to see which topics they are forming the link between.

Click on a linking issue to zoom in on the topics related to it. Altavista used to have an ability to select a "group" of issues and/or topics to very efficiently zoom in on exactly what you were looking for.

There are other prioritising search engines, such as;
http://www.vroosh.com has "group results" feature.
http://clusty.com/ has "clustering" feature

(anybody know where google does this? - summer of code?)

These system show inter-relations between topics, via their common issues/factors.
An additional step in relatedness, is the importance of the subtopics and issues.

The importance is much more subjective and depends on the person, and varies from person to person. So when a map of topics and inter-related issues is displayed, the user can customise the degree of emphasis (eg. color/apparent 3d height/shading boundary marker) for showing the more important areas.

The "importance" would help indicate where work needs to be done, or where opportunities are.

There are some great 3D visualizers, and data visualizers in open source, which could be used for this project.


Attachments
No attachments.


Duplicates


Comments
Eldmannen wrote on the 25 Jun 08 at 10:58
FreeMind;
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeMind
* http://freemind.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Craig73 wrote on the 25 Jun 08 at 21:00
Perhaps simplify this to just the graphical browser - there might be some real value here

I think first priority is to get the "related articles" join implemented (and hopefully streamline/improve the dups process)

Then, with that in place, I think for those big picture types, being able to zoom out and see all the related articles graphically ... especially one or two jumps away might improve navigation

That being said... I think the semantic search automation you are suggesting seems like too much for the volume of ideas there is at this point.

Assuming we can identify the number of unique ideas by improving the purging process... I think there might be more value in retiring/archiving dead ideas.

Tree MendUs wrote on the 31 Jul 08 at 04:34
Thanks for the comments folks.

Re Craig73

1) re: "simplify this to just the graphical browser"
I thought a text version might be simpler, but both are possible, and both have been done elsewhere. So which ever is thought to be a good way to start is OK with me.
So yes.

2) re: "first priority is to get the "related articles" join implemented"
I fully agree.
See some submissions on creating "related to"(not dups) links, and other forms of indentifying and analysing individual info/ideas relationships.

Idea #10259: "Related to" Grab Bag feature for Brainstorm.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10259/

Idea #10082: Discussions, Pros and Cons used to auto-find problems and critical benefits.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10082/

Idea #10257: Auto-Assign a label to comments for (future) cross referencing & links.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10257/

Idea #10080: Ideas handling- Multiple Ideas -Hyperlinked Relationships & Parameters.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/10080/


3) re: "I think for those big picture types, being able to zoom out".

It's not just the ability to zoom back out for a big picture, but also the ability to zoom in to burrow for the differences or commonalities ... to get to the "bottom" of a matter.


4) re "semantic search automation you are suggesting seems like too much for the volume of ideas"

Currently the number of ideas is less than 20,000, and the numbers of comments is less than 60,000.

These figures are very small compared to the number of pages that may be returned on an initial subject search on the net (millions).
So the volume of ideas is not likely to be a problem even if the topic were to be so large as to include all the categories in Brainstorm, if current technology is used.


5) re "Assuming we can identify the number of unique ideas by improving the purging process"
The assumption that purging is a way to identify unique ideas, may or may not be correct. But if there is a "purging" process done to the list that seeks "uniqueness", then there will be very few examples of topics that overlap each other, have a symbiotic or codependent relationship.

There is a subtle difference between bringing order, and removing diversity. one is cleaning "up", the other is cleaning "out".

Whenever we have a list/database and we want to look at "some" of it, we can do a "sort"/"search" for the items that we want. But it is a very brutal process if we go through and dump(purge) everything else that "we" don't want to see right now.
That is what a search engine does - even one that isn't much good.
(But if it can not do that - then it is Not a search engine.)

Thank you for your interest in features that improve the analysis of ideas and information Brainstorm system.


Re Eldmannen
Thanks for the links.
FreeMind is in the Ubuntu Packages for Hardy and Intrepid;
http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=freemind&searchon=names&suite=all&se ction=all
The technology is available already, so it could be used, if wanted.


Post your comment