Connect with us

GOOGLE

Google: It’s Normal for 20% of a Site to Not Be Indexed

Published

on

Google: It’s Normal for 20% of a Site to Not Be Indexed

Google’s John Mueller answered a question about indexing, offering insights into how overall site quality influences indexing patterns. He also offered the insight that it’s within the bounds of normal that 20% of a site’s content is not indexed.

Pages Discovered But Not Crawled

The person asking the question offered background information about their site.

Of particular concern was the stated fact that the server was overloaded and if that might affect how many pages Google indexes.

When a server is overloaded the request for a web page may result in a 500 error response. This is because when a server cannot serve a web page the standard response is a 500 Internal Server Error message.

The person asking the question did not mention that Google Search Console was reporting that Googlebot was receiving 500 error response codes.

So if it’s the case that Googlebot did not receive a 500 error response then the server overload issue is probably not the reason why 20% of the pages are not getting indexed.

The person asked the following question:

“20% of my pages are not getting indexed.

It says they’re discovered but not crawled.

Does this have anything to do with the fact that it’s not crawled because of potential overload of my server?

Or does it have to do with the quality of the page?”

Crawl Budget Not Generally Why Small Sites Have Non-indexed Pages

Google’s John Mueller offered an interesting explanation of how overall site quality is an important factor that determines whether Googlebot will index more web pages.

But first he discussed how the crawl budget isn’t usually a reason why pages remain non-indexed for a small site.

John Mueller answered:

“Probably a little of both.

So usually if we’re talking about a smaller site then it’s mostly not a case that we’re limited by the crawling capacity, which is the crawl budget side of things.

If we’re talking about a site that has millions of pages, then that’s something where I would consider looking at the crawl budget side of things.

But smaller sites probably less so.”

Overall Site Quality Determines Indexing

John next went into detail about how overall site quality can affect how much of a website is crawled and indexed.

This part is especially interesting because it gives a peek at how Google evaluates a site in terms of quality and how the overall impression influences indexing.

Mueller continued his answer:

“With regards to the quality, when it comes to understanding the quality of the website, that is something that we take into account quite strongly with regards to crawling and indexing of the rest of the website.

But that’s not something that’s necessarily related to the individual URL.

So if you have five pages that are not indexed at the moment, it’s not that those five pages are the ones we would consider low quality.

It’s more that …overall, we consider this website maybe to be a little bit lower quality. And therefore we won’t go off and index everything on this site.

Because if we don’t have that page indexed, then we’re not really going to know if that’s high quality or low quality.

So that’s the direction I would head there …if you have a smaller site and you’re seeing a significant part of your pages are not being indexed, then I would take a step back and try to reconsider the overall quality of the website and not focus so much on technical issues for those pages.”

Technical Factors and Indexing

Mueller next mentions technical factors and how easy it is for modern sites to get that part right so that it doesn’t get in the way of indexing.

Mueller observed:

“Because I think, for the most part, sites nowadays are technically reasonable.

If you’re using a common CMS then it’s really hard to do something really wrong.

And it’s often more a matter of the overall quality.”

It’s Normal for 20% of a Site to Not Be Indexed

This next part is also interesting in that Mueller downplays 20% of a site not indexed as something that is within the bounds of normal.

Mueller has more access to information about how much of sites are typically not indexed so I take him at his word because he speaking from the perspective of Google.

Mueller explains why it’s normal for pages to not be indexed:

“The other thing to keep in mind with regards to indexing, is it’s completely normal that we don’t index everything off of the website.

So if you look at any larger website or any even midsize or smaller website, you’ll see fluctuations in indexing.

It’ll go up and down and it’s never going to be the case that we index 100% of everything that’s on a website.

So if you have a hundred pages and (I don’t know) 80 of them are being indexed, then I wouldn’t see that as being a problem that you need to fix.

That’s sometimes just how it is for the moment.

And over time, when you get to like 200 pages on your website and we index 180 of them, then that percentage gets a little bit smaller.

But it’s always going to be the case that we don’t index 100% of everything that we know about.”

Don’t Panic if Pages Aren’t Indexed

There’s quite a lot of information Mueller shared about indexing to take in.

  • It’s within the bounds of normal for 20% of a site to not be indexed.
  • Technical issues probably won’t impeded indexing.
  • Overall site quality can determine how much of a site gets indexed.
  • How much of a site gets indexed fluctuates.
  • Small sites generally don’t have to worry about crawl budget.

Citation

It’s Normal for 20% of a Site to be Non-indexed
Watch Mueller discussing what is normal indexing from about the 27:26 minute mark.

Searchenginejournal.com

Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address

AI

Exploring the Evolution of Language Translation: A Comparative Analysis of AI Chatbots and Google Translate

Published

on

By

A Comparative Analysis of AI Chatbots and Google Translate

According to an article on PCMag, while Google Translate makes translating sentences into over 100 languages easy, regular users acknowledge that there’s still room for improvement.

In theory, large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT are expected to bring about a new era in language translation. These models consume vast amounts of text-based training data and real-time feedback from users worldwide, enabling them to quickly learn to generate coherent, human-like sentences in a wide range of languages.

However, despite the anticipation that ChatGPT would revolutionize translation, previous experiences have shown that such expectations are often inaccurate, posing challenges for translation accuracy. To put these claims to the test, PCMag conducted a blind test, asking fluent speakers of eight non-English languages to evaluate the translation results from various AI services.

The test compared ChatGPT (both the free and paid versions) to Google Translate, as well as to other competing chatbots such as Microsoft Copilot and Google Gemini. The evaluation involved comparing the translation quality for two test paragraphs across different languages, including Polish, French, Korean, Spanish, Arabic, Tagalog, and Amharic.

In the first test conducted in June 2023, participants consistently favored AI chatbots over Google Translate. ChatGPT, Google Bard (now Gemini), and Microsoft Bing outperformed Google Translate, with ChatGPT receiving the highest praise. ChatGPT demonstrated superior performance in converting colloquialisms, while Google Translate often provided literal translations that lacked cultural nuance.

For instance, ChatGPT accurately translated colloquial expressions like “blow off steam,” whereas Google Translate produced more literal translations that failed to resonate across cultures. Participants appreciated ChatGPT’s ability to maintain consistent levels of formality and its consideration of gender options in translations.

The success of AI chatbots like ChatGPT can be attributed to reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF), which allows these models to learn from human preferences and produce culturally appropriate translations, particularly for non-native speakers. However, it’s essential to note that while AI chatbots outperformed Google Translate, they still had limitations and occasional inaccuracies.

In a subsequent test, PCMag evaluated different versions of ChatGPT, including the free and paid versions, as well as language-specific AI agents from OpenAI’s GPTStore. The paid version of ChatGPT, known as ChatGPT Plus, consistently delivered the best translations across various languages. However, Google Translate also showed improvement, performing surprisingly well compared to previous tests.

Overall, while ChatGPT Plus emerged as the preferred choice for translation, Google Translate demonstrated notable improvement, challenging the notion that AI chatbots are always superior to traditional translation tools.


Source: https://www.pcmag.com/articles/google-translate-vs-chatgpt-which-is-the-best-language-translator

Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Continue Reading

GOOGLE

Google Implements Stricter Guidelines for Mass Email Senders to Gmail Users

Published

on

1280x924 gmail

Beginning in April, Gmail senders bombarding users with unwanted mass emails will encounter a surge in message rejections unless they comply with the freshly minted Gmail email sender protocols, Google cautions.

Fresh Guidelines for Dispatching Mass Emails to Gmail Inboxes In an elucidative piece featured on Forbes, it was highlighted that novel regulations are being ushered in to shield Gmail users from the deluge of unsolicited mass emails. Initially, there were reports surfacing about certain marketers receiving error notifications pertaining to messages dispatched to Gmail accounts. Nonetheless, a Google representative clarified that these specific errors, denoted as 550-5.7.56, weren’t novel but rather stemmed from existing authentication prerequisites.

Moreover, Google has verified that commencing from April, they will initiate “the rejection of a portion of non-compliant email traffic, progressively escalating the rejection rate over time.” Google elaborates that, for instance, if 75% of the traffic adheres to the new email sender authentication criteria, then a portion of the remaining non-conforming 25% will face rejection. The exact proportion remains undisclosed. Google does assert that the implementation of the new regulations will be executed in a “step-by-step fashion.”

This cautious and methodical strategy seems to have already kicked off, with transient errors affecting a “fraction of their non-compliant email traffic” coming into play this month. Additionally, Google stipulates that bulk senders will be granted until June 1 to integrate “one-click unsubscribe” in all commercial or promotional correspondence.

Exclusively Personal Gmail Accounts Subject to Rejection These alterations exclusively affect bulk emails dispatched to personal Gmail accounts. Entities sending out mass emails, specifically those transmitting a minimum of 5,000 messages daily to Gmail accounts, will be mandated to authenticate outgoing emails and “refrain from dispatching unsolicited emails.” The 5,000 message threshold is tabulated based on emails transmitted from the same principal domain, irrespective of the employment of subdomains. Once the threshold is met, the domain is categorized as a permanent bulk sender.

These guidelines do not extend to communications directed at Google Workspace accounts, although all senders, including those utilizing Google Workspace, are required to adhere to the updated criteria.

Augmented Security and Enhanced Oversight for Gmail Users A Google spokesperson emphasized that these requisites are being rolled out to “fortify sender-side security and augment user control over inbox contents even further.” For the recipient, this translates to heightened trust in the authenticity of the email sender, thus mitigating the risk of falling prey to phishing attempts, a tactic frequently exploited by malevolent entities capitalizing on authentication vulnerabilities. “If anything,” the spokesperson concludes, “meeting these stipulations should facilitate senders in reaching their intended recipients more efficiently, with reduced risks of spoofing and hijacking by malicious actors.”

Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Continue Reading

GOOGLE

Google’s Next-Gen AI Chatbot, Gemini, Faces Delays: What to Expect When It Finally Launches

Published

on

By

Google AI Chatbot Gemini

In an unexpected turn of events, Google has chosen to postpone the much-anticipated debut of its revolutionary generative AI model, Gemini. Initially poised to make waves this week, the unveiling has now been rescheduled for early next year, specifically in January.

Gemini is set to redefine the landscape of conversational AI, representing Google’s most potent endeavor in this domain to date. Positioned as a multimodal AI chatbot, Gemini boasts the capability to process diverse data types. This includes a unique proficiency in comprehending and generating text, images, and various content formats, even going so far as to create an entire website based on a combination of sketches and written descriptions.

Originally, Google had planned an elaborate series of launch events spanning California, New York, and Washington. Regrettably, these events have been canceled due to concerns about Gemini’s responsiveness to non-English prompts. According to anonymous sources cited by The Information, Google’s Chief Executive, Sundar Pichai, personally decided to postpone the launch, acknowledging the importance of global support as a key feature of Gemini’s capabilities.

Gemini is expected to surpass the renowned ChatGPT, powered by OpenAI’s GPT-4 model, and preliminary private tests have shown promising results. Fueled by significantly enhanced computing power, Gemini has outperformed GPT-4, particularly in FLOPS (Floating Point Operations Per Second), owing to its access to a multitude of high-end AI accelerators through the Google Cloud platform.

SemiAnalysis, a research firm affiliated with Substack Inc., expressed in an August blog post that Gemini appears poised to “blow OpenAI’s model out of the water.” The extensive compute power at Google’s disposal has evidently contributed to Gemini’s superior performance.

Google’s Vice President and Manager of Bard and Google Assistant, Sissie Hsiao, offered insights into Gemini’s capabilities, citing examples like generating novel images in response to specific requests, such as illustrating the steps to ice a three-layer cake.

While Google’s current generative AI offering, Bard, has showcased noteworthy accomplishments, it has struggled to achieve the same level of consumer awareness as ChatGPT. Gemini, with its unparalleled capabilities, is expected to be a game-changer, demonstrating impressive multimodal functionalities never seen before.

During the initial announcement at Google’s I/O developer conference in May, the company emphasized Gemini’s multimodal prowess and its developer-friendly nature. An application programming interface (API) is under development, allowing developers to seamlessly integrate Gemini into third-party applications.

As the world awaits the delayed unveiling of Gemini, the stakes are high, with Google aiming to revolutionize the AI landscape and solidify its position as a leader in generative artificial intelligence. The postponed launch only adds to the anticipation surrounding Gemini’s eventual debut in the coming year.

Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Continue Reading

Trending