SEOzone Meetups'ın Ocak ayı için yaptığım sunumda SEO'nun geleceği konusunda, benim ve endüstri liderlerinin görüşlerini bir araya getirdim. Bu sunumda, Hubspot'un "History of SEO", Rand Fishkin'in "Ranking Factors 2015" ve "Mad Science Experiments in SEO & Social Media" ile Marcus Tober'in SEOzone'da yaptığı "Ranking Factors for Mobile & Desktop Search" sunumlarından bazı alıntılar yaptım. Ayrıca Google sıralamalarının değişimi için Dr. Pete'in efsanevi "Beyond 10 Blue Links: The Future of Ranking" sunumundan bazı eklemeler yapıp, Web 3.0 kavramından bahsederken Hatem Mahmoud'un "Web 3.0 - Semantic Web" sunumundan faydalandım. Türkiye'deki pazara ait örnekleri verirken, R10.net üzerindeki bazı başlıklardan örnekler seçtim. Bu başlıklar tamamen rastgele seçilmiş olup, ilgili kişilerin isimleri blurlanarak, kişisel bir yönelim olmadığını ve sektörün içinde olduğu durumu göstermek için belirtilmiştir.
İlgili sunumlara ait linkler:
(Thanks for these contributors who deliver great materials to industry)
Marcus Tober: http://www.slideshare.net/seozeo/seozone-2015-marcus-tober-ranking-factors-for-mobile-and-desktop-search
Rand Fishkin: http://www.slideshare.net/randfish/mad-science-experiments-in-seo-social-media
Rand Fishkin: www.slideshare.net/randfish/search-ranking-factors-in-2015/
Rand Fishkin: http://www.slideshare.net/randfish/onsite-seo-in-2015-an-elegant-weapon-for-a-more-civilized-marketer
Dr. Pete Meyers: www.slideshare.net/crumplezone/beyond-10-blue-links-the-future-of-ranking
Hatem Mahmoud: http://www.slideshare.net/HatemMahmoud/web-30-the-semantic-web/136
Hubspot: www.slideshare.net/HubSpot/hub-spot-historyofseocoffeetips/
2. Yapay Zeka Dünyası SEO'nun Geleceği
SEO endüstrisinin liderlerinin görüşleriyle, 2020 yılında SEO nerede olacak?
Rand Fishkin & Marcus Tober’e sağladıkları veri paylaşım izninden ötürü
teşekkür ederiz.
3. 3
SEO’nun Geleceğini Anlamak için, Geçmişe Bir Bakış Atmalıyız
Bu sunumda verilerini kullandığımız, Rand Fishkin, Marcus Tober, Hatem Mahmoud,
Yashwanth Korla ve Dharmesh Shah’a teşekkürler!
+ + =
241. Early On, Google Rejected Machine Learning in the
Organic Ranking Algo
Via Datawocky,
2008
242. By 2013, It Was
Something Google’s
Search Folks Talked
About Publicly
Via SELand
243. Google is Public About How They Use ML in Image
Recognition & Classification
Potential ID Factors
(e.g. color, shapes, gradients,
perspective, interlacing, alt tags,
surrounding text, etc)
Training Data
(i.e. human-labeled images)
Learning
Process
Best
Match
Algo
244. Google is Public About How They Use ML in Image
Recognition & Classification
Via Jeff Dean’s Slides on Deep Learning; a Must Read for SEOs
245. Deep Learning is Even More Advanced:
Dean says by using deep learning,
they don’t have to tell the system
what a cat is, the machines learn,
unsupervised, for themselves…
247. Machine Learning in Search Could Work Like This:
Potential Ranking
Factors
(e.g. PageRank, TF*IDF,
Topic Modeling, QDF, Clicks,
EntityAssociation, etc.)
Training Data
(i.e. good & bad search results)
Learning
Process
Best Fit
Algo
248. Training Data
(e.g. good search results)
This is a good SERP – searchers
rarely bounce, rarely short-click,
and rarely need to enter other
queries or go to page 2.
249. Training Data
(e.g. bad search results!)
This is a bad SERP – searchers
bounce often, click other results,
rarely long-click, and try other
queries. They’re definitely not
happy.
251. The Query Success Metrics Will Be All That
Matters to the Machines
Long to Short Click Ratio Relative CTR vs. Other Results
Rate of Searchers Conducting
Additional, Related Searches
Metrics of User Engagement
on the Page
Metrics of User Engagement
Across the Domain
Sharing/Amplifcation Rate
vs. Other Results
252. The Query Success Metrics Will Be All That
Matters to the Machines
Long to Short Click Ratio Relative CTR vs. Other Results
Rate of Searchers Conducting
Additional, Related Searches
Metrics of User Engagement
on the Page
Metrics of User Engagement
Across the Domain
Sharing/Amplifcation Rate
vs. Other Results
If lots of results on a SERP do
these well, and higher results
outperform lower results, our
deep learning algo will consider
it a success.
253. OK… Maybe in the future.
But, do those kinds of
metrics really affect SEO
today?
259. 40 Minutes & ~400
Interactions Later
Moved up 2 positions after 2+ weeks
of the top 5 staying static.
260. 70 Minutes & ~500
Interactions Total
Moved up to #1.
261. Stayed ~12 hours, when it
fell to #13+ for ~8 hours,
then back to #4.
Google?You
messing with us?
262. Via Google Trends, we can see the relative
impact of the test on query volume
~5-10X normal volume over
3-4 hours
263. BTW – This is hard to replicate. 600+
real searchers using a variety of
devices, browsers, accounts, geos,
etc. will not look the same to Google
as a Fiverr buy, a clickfarm, or a bot.
And note how G penalized the page
after the test… They might not put it
back if they thought the site itself was
to blame for the click manipulation.
264. 264
It is not just machine learning
It is about experience!