#Algorithm Updates August 2023 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

cindylouwho-2 · 8 months ago

Text

Etsy Third Quarter 2024 Earnings Report: Search Diversity and Listing Quality Are Working As Intended, So Don't Expect Reversals

Slide 7 from Etsy's Q3 2024 Earnings Presentation, © Etsy

Etsy's gross marketplace sales (GMS) were down again in the third quarter of 2024, and are also expected to be lower than 2023 in the all-important fourth quarter holiday season. So essentially, nothing has changed in the past few months.

While the company didn't have any really good news or huge announcements for investors, some of the statements from CEO Josh Silverman are of interest to the site's sellers, including the info on search ranking. In short, they aren't going to be reversing the recent search changes any time soon.

With the details on that and other points of interest, please read on for my summary of this quarterly report! As always, I am mostly just reporting what they tell us, with my own commentary in square brackets until the last section.

First, here are the official sources:

the press release

transcript of the conference call

slides from the conference call

video of the call (click on “Webcast”)

my summaries of the third quarter 2023, and the second quarter 2024 for comparison

And the key numbers (covering July to September 2024, compared to the same period in 2023):

Sales on Etsy were $2.5 billion, down 6% year over year

Total sales for all 3 marketplaces - Etsy, Reverb, and Depop - were $2.9 billion, down 4.1%. [Elo7 was officially sold in mid-August 2023, so its numbers were still included in the comparison totals, making the total drop appear a little worse than it actually was for the remaining 3 sites]

Etsy’s revenue including all 3 sites was $662.4 million, up 4.1%

Seller service revenue was up 6.2% , while marketplace revenue was up 3.3% across all 3 sites

Net income was $57.4 million, down 34.7%

Active buyers on Etsy alone stand at 91.2 million, down slightly

Active sellers on Etsy alone are at 6.2 million, down half a million from the third quarter 2023 and down 400,000 from the second quarter 2024. [Note that “active” means one charge or transaction in the past 12 months; many “active” shops currently have nothing for sale]

49% of sales on Etsy now involve at least one party outside of the US, some both. [based on recent trends, the majority of GMS on Etsy will not be US-domestic very soon]

Search: Etsy Is Happy With the Recent Algorithm Updates

Etsy continues to attempt to demonstrate that the site has a "wide range of items", changing search results through "a three-pronged approach focused on diversity, quality, and agency."

"Diversity" of search results was previously about showing fewer of the same item on the first pages, but the algorithm has now moved to reducing "similar images...We're now seeing an approximately 40% reduction in search results where at least a quarter of the listings look alike." That means that if there used to be 100 search queries where at least 25% of the items on the first page look similar, there would now only be 60 search queries like that. Also, more sellers made at least one sale in the quarter compared to 2023 [which seems to indicate that searchers are seeing more diversity in listings.]

"Quality" is largely about how happy the buyer will be once they receive their order. This includes "...having a shipping charge that aligns with buyer expectations, providing [a] return policy, and the shop's level of customer service." [Yes, I repeat once again, shipping price is a search factor, especially in domestic searches. While I found that the $6 US domestic shipping threshold wasn't a big deal at the moment - meaning that a US seller changing a domestic shipping price from $6.25 to $5.99 wouldn't make any real ranking difference - overall, big changes in shipping prices can affect ranking, and lower shipping prices are ranking better in most large searches. No doubt the fact that lower shipping tends to convert better on average doesn't hurt.]

"Agency" is focussed on better communication with sellers regarding how search works and what listings can be improved. Since the Etsy Search Visibility page was introduced, "sellers have lowered shipping charges on approximately 2.5 million items to better meet buyer expectations", which was more than Etsy expected.

More Focus On The App, Including The Landing Page

Etsy's buyer app is still responsible for less than half of the sales on Etsy, despite app users spending at least 40% more than non-app users. Therefore, Etsy is continuing to push app downloads, including by suggesting them earlier during mobile browser shopping visits than they used to.

The app homepage has also changed, removing some of the "rear-view mirror impressions" (aka showing things you have previously shopped for), and replacing them with listings AI thinks you are likely to want to shop for, based on your history and other data. Silverman gave the example of someone shopping for wedding cake toppers being shown other wedding products on the home page.

[I think this is a good improvement, even if the AI ends up being wrong most of the time. It is particularly annoying to make a one-off purchase then be suggested similar items for months to come. Thanks, Etsy, but I don't need another 50th birthday card right now...]

Gifts

Over a million gift lists have been created, and 1.3 million visits to the site happened through gift teasers. As I reported in my last quarterly report review, physical Etsy gift cards will now be available in many retail outlets in the United States, and Etsy is now selling physical gift cards on the site. Silverman commented that "people who redeem a gift card tend to buy more than the value of the gift card", so the cards have a bonus effect on sales.

The number of orders involving gifts grew compared to 2023, which is encouraging given that overall sales were down.

And Why Are Sales Still Down?

US discretionary spending is still dropping, as the chart below shows. [Note that it is still a higher percentage of the total compared to 2019, though.]

CFO Rachel Glaser also admitted that the company's various changes in search and in pushing the app likely hurt sales a bit; Silverman later concurred. Silverman previously stated that getting rid of problem sellers earlier this year may have cost them 0.5% GMS then. But as Glaser mentions "when we lose a seller, we rarely lose a sale, given the large amount of substitution available."

[While sales were down, the total number of sellers was also down, so the average sales per shop were almost the same as they were in 2023. Etsy's small decrease in sales overall cannot be blamed by shops that have had a large decrease in sales, then - there must be something else going on. See my conclusions for more.]

The fourth quarter is also predicted to be down around the same amount. When asked by an analyst, Silverman refused to give an update on October sales, which is unusual in these calls; they often give a general impression of how things have been going in the new quarter.

Miscellaneous

They are still working on fixing the Creativity Standards labels on listings, and testing ways to show that info to shoppers. [Future changes here could have a large impact; I am not sure when we should expect them, unfortunately. It may not happen until 2025.]

Depop getting rid of some seller fees is credited with at least part of the site's excellent quarter, with good sales in both the United States and Australia.

"Reverb continued to focus on operational efficiencies to drive profitability and value-added services for its community" - which is Silverman-speak for "we laid more people off at Reverb".

99% of GMS now uses Etsy Payments, up from 93% last year. This led to marketplace revenue being up 3.3% YOY.

Sellers affected by recent hurricanes were given extensions on bills and on Star Seller, and some were offered disaster grants. [Since Etsy rarely mentions these things to the community at the time, some shop owners do fall through the cracks and don't realize they can demand accommodations. This is one area where eBay provides better seller support when disasters occur, simply by mentioning that will be adjusting seller metrics for those affected.]

Etsy has over $1 billion in cash sitting around, so they are going to be buying back a lot more stock.

"[W]hen we did our seller research and our buyer research, they both said we'd love free shipping as long as it doesn't mean that sellers have to have lower margins. ... this is one of the wonderful things about Etsy that I think is so different than anywhere else." So yes, many Etsy buyers understand shipping isn't free and they don't want sellers to eat that cost - but they'd still like free shipping. This is one of the key things Etsy is testing through the Etsy Insider program.

My Thoughts: If You Have Had A Very Recent Drop In Sales, Look Carefully At ALL Of The Changes In The Past Year

Overall, there was very little announced this time around, and the refusal to give any idea of how October went was a bit disturbing. It's not a lot to go on when looking to the future.

What we do know is that they are happy with how search is going, so sellers should not expect recent changes to be rolled back any time soon. If your sales suddenly started to drop in the last year, you need to consider all of the new factors carefully, as many of them work together.

First, check the Customer Service Stats page to make sure you are above the minimum levels for each category; the minimums are lower than Star Seller standards and should be considered strict rules you don't want to break. Yes, you need to reply to 80% of your messages within 2 days. Use the weekly autoreply if you are struggling with this factor; you don't have a choice if you want to be seen, and to keep selling well. Shops have already been closed or threatened with closure based on these stats.

Next, make sure everything is ok on the Search Visibility Page. Note that you still may need to make improvements in these areas, even if the page says your shop is fine. In particular, Etsy is only flagging ridiculously low resolution photos as too small, while really every listing image should be at least 2000 px in both directions. Here's my video on how to check your image sizes. And if you don't agree with Etsy's assessment on dark or blurry photos, get a critique, because I have seen some people disagreeing with Etsy's rating when in fact their photos were a bit dark or blurry or too cluttered. Photo quality has been in a least some of Etsy's algorithms for over a year now, as I have been telling everyone repeatedly; it's time to take it seriously.

One of the most difficult new factors to deal with is Etsy's interest in listing diversity. It's hard to guess how far Etsy is going to go with this, or how it might interact with other longer-term plans such as using the Creativity categories more visibly on the site. While this initiative seems to flow from too many shoppers thinking items using the same components or patterns as others must be drop shipped, it seems to be affecting larger shops with all types of merchandise. If more shops are getting at least one sale now, those sales had to be taken from somewhere.

My old advice to not rely on large searches to get the bulk of your sales applies more than ever. Diversifying your own products in search terms, styles, target markets etc. is probably more important now than it used to be. You may also want to consider consolidating similar listings in some cases, if they usually only show up in larger searches and are competing with your other items. (Silverman said last quarter that they were reducing instances of the same shop appearing on the same page.) This works best for items you are offering in different colours, and if at least some of those colours match Etsy's colour attributes, which makes them searchable without wasting title or tag space. You can use the video feature to show all of the colour offerings in a slide show. Keep the ones that already have good quality scores and add the lesser-performing ones to the more popular listings. Since custom attributes aren't searchable, this isn't going to be possible with many types of products, though.

My final bit of advice for shops with recent drops in sales is: don't assume that only one issue could be impacting you. For example, I am seeing people deny that their small photos could be hurting them, because "they've always been fine and my only real issue is with shipping cost/fake views/diversity" etc. It's far more likely that more than one factor is holding your shop back, if your sales have suddenly crashed.

And remember, even if your photos have been the right size for years and you have always offered free shipping, that doesn't mean you will continue to stay on top. If your competition improves in some of these areas, they could overtake you without you doing anything wrong at all. As Etsy narrows what each visitor sees, many shops will not be able to maintain their previous sales levels, at least not without significant pivots. All sellers need to accept that, and make plans accordingly.

#ecommerce #EtsySellerNews #cindylouwho2 #etsy

7 notes · View notes

tr0v3 · 8 months ago

Text

The Decline of Lethal Company

Previously, I explained Lethal Company's rise to success as a result of good game design, player experiences (with reference to Indie VS. AAA comparisons) and exceptional appeal to emotional and social experiences as an indie game - you can read the full article here!

Now, I'd like to challenge the game's standing - in the year since its launch, how much has Lethal Company maintained its success?

When Zeekers (the developer of Lethal Company) released the game on Oct 23rd 2023, it was up to 'Version 35' - at the time of writing the game has last updated to Version 66. A lot of features have been added to Lethal Company over time, but few updates have affected interest or mitigated the consistent decline in Lethal Company's popularity. Internet search timeline statistics can be a useful way to generally indicate popularity (or at least curiosity and awareness) about a topic, and by comparing these to the release dates of Lethal Company updates, we can see that updates either did not affect or actually worsened Lethal Company's decline.

According to Google Trends, Lethal Company managed to stay in the limelight of heightened popularity for about 11 weeks:

Google searches for Lethal Company peaked from the end of November to the start of December 2023, declining only by 25% as the year ended and maintaining high search rates until a sharper decline starting on January 14th.

Similiarly, YouTube searches indicate a similiar 11-week period of popularity, with searches peaking twice in December, also beginning a sharper decline below 75% only January 14th:

The differences can be explained because of the differences in functionality and culture of Google Search and YouTube - YouTube searches may have dipped in mid December because of faster moving algorithmic trends on that platform, or the growth of established Lethal Company fans who consume Lethal Company videos from Lethal Company subscriptions, therefore eliminating the need to search for it again.

Regardless, Steam Charts also demonstrate that Lethal Company has begun a long decline since January. Measuring weekly players rather than searches provides an even more accurate insight into engagement with the game, and - although 20k+ players a week at its lowest is nothing to scoff at - the game's players and searches have been consistently dropping throughout 2024. The only exception to this is peaks in all three charts around mid-late August, likely in response to 'Version 60 - The Stuffy Update'.

So why the attention for V60? Reviews for the game have remained Overwhelmingly Positive since launch, and other updates have added fantastically memorable and impactful features - to prove this point, here are a few examples:

• Version 45, a.k.a. 'The Frosty Update', added two game-changing enemies. The Masked is an eerie and confusing threat for all players which has become a staple of the base game, inspiring numerous mods that emphasize the 'hidden threat' mechanic, such as Skinwalkers. The Nutcracker, if killed, rewards players with a gun that can one-shot-kill numerous enemies, enabling players to take greater risks in the late game. Both are also brilliant at generating the emotional impact I explained in Part 1 due to their unique and scary appearances and sound designs.

youtube

• Version 50, a.k.a. 'The Hopping Update', introduced 3 entire moons and 3 new 'entities' among other changes - not every change was imense, but there's no denying how exciting Artifice is to play, and how nightmarish the Old Birds are.

• Additionally, none of the game's best features have ever been lost. In fact, the only time a feature was actually removed completly was the Kidnapper Fox, although Zeekers has hinted at the Kidnapper Fox returning in future.

This video by Exxo fantastically explains why this happened, but also challenges the decision and the opinion of the fanbase at the time:

youtube

Even smaller updates such as Version 55 added The Company Cruiser, a hilariously iconic and fun feature, even if its actual usefulness is questionable...So what makes Version 60 so special?

I believe that The Stuffy Update had one crucial feature absent from every other update however, one that doesn't even relate specifically to the emotional appeal of the game - a new interior.

When any game ages, it must pivot from focusing on eye-catching gimmicks that aid its virality, and instead focus on genuinely balanced game design - now that Lethal Company was garnering a fanbase of regular players instead of everyone being new to the experience, the novelty of its emotional appeal had worn off, so if it didn't 'hold up' as a replayable, dynamic, but fair game, it wouldn't keep those players.

Since release there have been at least eight moons and over a dozen entities to keep every in-game day varied - but only two interiors, one of which was common only on expensive moons. As the location of the player's main objective (collecting scrap), these interiors became the most repetitive component of the game - but a third interior that is common on multiple free moons brought much-needed variety to this important aspect of the game. Proportionally, it marked a 50% increase in the number of existing interiors, so it makes a massive difference.

Since Version 60, there have only been a couple of smaller updates such as The Bag Patch and the Anniversary Special because Zeekers has decided to focus on another project and give Lethal Company a rest in the meantime.

Interestingly, the Google Trends/Steam Charts above also show that the decline may be plateuing now - so now that we are caught up to the present, what is the state of the game going forward? Updates haven't made Lethal Company worse...but could they make it better?

Perhaps we need to inspect the game design more closely. Lethal Company, for all its merit, is in actuality a very janky and downright unfair game at times. Unwinnable scenarios as a result of RNG aren't uncommon, such as being chased by Giants with Eyeless Dogs nearby, or being teleported into a landmine or a turret. Even a supposedly helpful addition such as the Company Cruiser is obnoxiously difficult to drive without getting stuck or blowing up. This is something that could have gone unnoticed when the game was new and everyone was focused on its novelties and gimmicks. Now, with greater player knowledge of the game's functionality, these flaws are more exposed, and more frustrating for players genuinely trying to enjoy the game to its fullest.

Version 60 alone added something that was clearly missing from the game. It filled a gap in engagement, whereas other updates - although fun - added fairly random and unexpected features that no one was really asking for. If Zeekers continues in this fashion, the game won't get any worse - but a fourth interior, or a another variation of a core feature could raise the game's popularity again...

Of course, there is a risk of making too much change to the basic feeling of the game, something that Minecraft has been notorious for since Caves & Cliffs, but there are always people who complain about change, so maybe its worth the risk?

Or perhaps the 'decline' of Lethal Company is just a decline in the perception of Lethal Company - only the most interested will have the patience to have followed the game, no matter how good the changes were. Maybe most Internet users have simply 'moved on', and the remaining players aren't as strongly impacted by the novelty of the game's proximity chat, hence the shift of focus onto game balancing...

The game is still in Early Access. There is an incomplete story, judging by the cutscenes in each update, and likely many more features and fixes to come. As Zeekers said:

Don't worry, I am not done with Lethal Company.

and neither am I!

Thank you for reading =D

#indie games #lethal company

3 notes · View notes

a-fox-studies · 2 years ago

Text

August 24, 2023

Today was productive! @studaxy and I had a very chaotic 90 minutes focus session, but we got stuff done :3 we also reread Percy Jackson :D

Things I did today:

Read about Basic C programming concepts, was a little confused on bitwise operators but I got help from the codeblr discord server :3

Learned algorithms for traversal, insertion and deletion of elements from a single dimensional linear array (and made some cool notes :3)

Updated C programming record

Reread the first four chapters of Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief

🎧 Daylight - Taylor Swift

#dailyfoxposts #foxcomp #studyblr #studyspo #codeblr #study #note taking #math studyblr #physics studyblr #aesthetic #aesthetic study #study inspo #log #daily log

24 notes · View notes

digiligodigital · 2 years ago

Text

Google Algorithm Updates

Early Algorithm Updates (2003–2006) Florida (November 2003) Nofollow (January 2005) Jagger( September 2005) Big Daddy (December 2005)

Mid-2000s Algorithm Updates (2007–2010) Universal Search (May 2007) Vince (February 2009) Caffeine (December 2010) Panda (February 2011)

The Penguin and Hummingbird and Pigeon Era (2012–2013) Penguin (April 2012) Hummingbird (August 2013) Pigeon (July 2014)

Updates to Mobile-Focused Algorithms (2015–2018) Mobile-Friendly Update (April 2015) RankBrain (October 2015) Fred (March 2017) Mobile-First Indexing (March 2018) Recent Algorithm Updates (2018–2023) Medic (August 2018) BERT (October 2019) Broad Core Update (June 2021) Link Spam Update (December 2022)

To Know More About Google Algorithm Updates

#digital marketing #seo #google core update #google algorithm update #google #google update

8 notes · View notes

venkat3681 · 2 years ago

Text

Google's August 2023 Core Update has shaken up the SEO world! Expectations ran high after months of silence. What happened, and how's it impacting the web? Let's break it down.

#GoogleUpdate #SEO #AlgorithmUpdate #DigitalMarketing #Webmasters #SearchRanking #August2023Update #GoogleAlgorithm #SERP #OnlineVisibility #SearchEngineOptimization #WebTraffic #SEOTrends #GoogleSearch #SEOCommunity #CoreUpdate #RankingAlgorithm #KeywordRanking #GoogleSERP #SEOMetrics

2 notes · View notes

junfoong · 8 days ago

Text

💄 Week 8: the algorithm doesn't think I'm cute enough? Ughhh, DELETE that selfie !!!

Nyeahhh, selfies are for the hot people like for example ME 💅 ! Apparently... the effort of behind a new post isn't just for the aesthetic. iT's lAbOuRrRrrr. How emotional, strategic and deeply performative.

Aesthetic labour? what's that? Basically, it's the emotional and visual work required to present yourself in a way that fits the platforms standard of trends. i mean LOOKS MATTER right? since visual-first platform like Instagram, TikTok and YouTube existed for a reason... It's the part where the algorithm rewards users who align with dominant beauty norms.

Less authentic self-expression and more "what gets you seen" like ughhh, you know what i meant. It's self branding according to Marwick (2013) - users adopt influencer strategies to stay visible from posing, lighting, filters, angles , just all of it to the kind of unpaid performance.

All of that hard-work... The paycheck? Indeed, questionable... 🧍‍♂️

📲 Micro-celebrity & platform culture... Every user is a brand, you don't need to be famous - just be consistent, curated and clickable. However, I'll admit that it is pressuring to fit the aesthetic of the industry.

✨You are not posting for fun, it's your job, your role ✨

It's sO wEiRd that the lecture broke down on how this visibility of future affects our mental health as well as body image. It's not what it looks like — it's about needing to look that way to be seen. As for Mavroudis (2020) mentioned that this is the rising anxiety around physical appearance, especially when "success" online means to CONFORMING the algorithm's approved aesthetics or trends.

🔞 okay, this is awkward... Pornification....

As described by Drenten & Gurrieri (2019), it is the pressure to adopt sexualised aesthetics — commonly received from women and femmes that mirror the look of commercial porn. (Exaggerated curves, pouty lips, sultry poses)

Either way that kind of content itself is curated for visibility — not comforting in any other way. What's worst? The platform are so complicated !!! Ughhh, the algorithm is being biased you know 😒 !? Queer influencers, trans people and basically anyone who don't fit the cis-het white beauty standards are sOoOoo getting shadow-banned & ignored...

It's all about navigating systemic invisibility 💅

😒 sO, wHaT dOes tHiS hAvE tO dO wiTH diGitAL cItiZeNsHiP ?

this isn't just about what you post — it's supposed to be what platforms to let you be you! cOmE oN, tHiS iS 2025, what kind of "participation" is that if you have to pretend to be the "you" that people you see online.

Now it's all about being your true self !!!

Are we supposed to shape our digital selves, or just surviving in some platforms dumb algorithm?

References :

Marwick, A. E. (2013, January). Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281668405_Status_Update_Celebrity_Publicity_and_Branding_in_the_Social_Media_Age

Abidin, C. (2016). Visibility labour: Engaging with Influencers’ fashion brands and #OOTD advertorial campaigns on Instagram. Media International Australia, 161(1), 86–100.

Miguel, C., Clare, C., Ashworth, C. J., & Hoang, D. (2023). Self-branding and Content Creation Strategies on Instagram: a Case Study of Foodie Influencers. Information, Communication & Society, 27(8), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2023.2246524

Drenten, J., Gurrieri, L., & Tyler, M. (2019). Sexualized labour in digital culture: Instagram influencers, porn chic and the monetization of attention. Gender, Work & Organization, 27(1), 41–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12354

Duffy, B. E., & Meisner, C. (2022). Platform Governance at the margins: Social Media Creators’ Experiences with Algorithmic (in)visibility. Media, Culture & Society, 45(2), 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221111923

Khamis, S., Ang, L., & Welling, R. (2016, August). Self-branding, “micro-celebrity” and the rise of Social Media Influencers. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306922796_Self-branding_

#mda20009 #digital citizenship #aestheticlabour #body politics #microcelebrity #platform culture #onlinevisibility #week 8

1 note · View note

shaheersha · 2 months ago

Text

ABOUT SHAHEER

He is the founder of FOODIE SPOT Restaurant & Blogger .

He blogs most of the time when he is not at the Restaurant , born in 2002 ,Palakkad. always blogs the new Google updates

Google Algorithm

What is Google algorithm ?

A detailed set of standards known as Google's algorithm is used to figure out how websites rank in search results. In order to find out what visitors are looking for, it collects details from web pages and then ranks them due to their quality and importance. With Google making changes and algorithms improving almost daily, this technique is always improving.

Google Algorithm Updates

In 2025 google updated the core update on March 13 and finished update on March 27. It takes 2 weeks to complete it.

In an effort to make search results more relevant and useful, Google released its first major update of the year in March 2025.

According to an Overdrive Interactive post, this modification, which was fully implemented by March 27th, is a routine procedure that rebalances Google's evaluation and ranking of material.

In order to assess website value more comprehensively, the update also integrates Google's Helpful Content mechanism into the main algorithm.

Google Algorithm Updates History :

March 13, 2025

March 2025 Core Update

Google launched its March core update on March 13 and finished rolling out the update on March 27, taking two weeks to complete.

December 19, 2024

December 2024 Spam Update

Google launched its December spam update on December 19 and completed the rollout on December 26.

December 12, 2024

December 2024 Core Update

The December 2024 core update started on December 12 and finished rolling out on December 18.

November 19, 2024

Site Reputation Abuse (SRA)

Google has updated its site reputation abuse policy, introduced earlier this year, to tackle ‘parasite SEO’—a tactic where websites use established domains to manipulate search rankings through third-party content. While enforcement is currently handled manually, Google plans to introduce algorithmic updates to automate detection and demotion in the future.

November 11, 2024

November 2024 Core Update

Google’s November 2024 core update began on November 11 and concluded on December 5, taking three weeks to complete.

November 11, 2024

November 2024 Core Update

Google released the November 2024 core update on November 11. The rollout may take up to two weeks to complete.

August 15, 2024

August 2024 Core Update

Google’s August 2024 core update aims to promote high-quality content while demoting low-value SEO content. The update started rolling out on August 15. The rollout was complete as of September 3, 2024.

July 31, 2024

Explicit Fake Content Update

Update to Google’s search algorithm to address non-consensual explicit content, specifically targeting artificially generated images and videos known as ‘deepfakes.’

June 20, 2024

June 2024 Spam Update

Google has started implementing the June 2024 spam update, which is expected to take a week to finish.

May 14, 2024

AI Overviews

Google introduces AI-generated summaries (previously known as SGE) to U.S. search results, utilizing the new Gemini model designed specifically for search.

May 6, 2024

Site Reputation Abuse

Google’s SearchLiaison confirmed that Google’s site reputation abuse update started on Monday May 6th with manual actions to be followed at some point in the future with algorithmic ones.

March 5, 2024

March 2024 Core Update

Google’s March 2024 Core Update addresses low-quality content and introduces new policies on spam to combat manipulative practices.

It began on March 5 and was completed on April 19, taking 45 days to roll out. The completion of the update wasn’t announced until April 26.

November 8, 2023

November 2023 Reviews Update

Google announced an algorithm update targeting review content on a page-level basis. It began on November 8 and completed on December 7

November 2, 2023

November 2023 Core Update

Google announced a core algorithm update, which began on November 2 and was completed on November 28. To learn more about core updates, see the Google Search Central Blog.

October 5, 2023

October 2023 Core Update

Google announced a core algorithm update, which began on October 5 and was completed on October 19. To learn more about core updates,

October 4, 2023

October 2023 Spam Update

Google announced the launch of the October 2023 Spam Update, which began on October 4 and was completed on October 19. This update applies globally and improves coverage in many languages,

September 14, 2023

September 2023 Helpful Content Update

Google announced the launch of the September 2023 Helpful Content Update, which began on September 14 and was completed on September 28. Site owners who want to learn more about helpful content updates can find more information on the Google Search Central Blog.

August 22, 2023

August 2023 Core Update

Google announced a core algorithm update, which began on August 22 and concluded on September 7. To learn more about core updates, see the Google Search Central Blog.

April 12, 2023

April 2023 Reviews Update

Google announced an algorithm update targeting review content on a page-level basis. It began on April 12 and finished rolling out on April 25. To learn more about core updates, see the Google Search Central Blog.

March 15, 2023

March 2023 Core Update

Google announced a core algorithm update, which began on March 15 and finished rolling out on March 28. To learn more about core updates, see the Google Search Central Blog.

February 21, 2023

February 2023 Product Reviews Update

Google announced the launch of the February 2023 Product Reviews Update, which began on February 21 and was completed on March 18. The update applies to these languages globally: English, Spanish, German, French, Italian, Vietnamese, Indonesian, Russian, Dutch, Portuguese, and Polish. See the Google Search Central Blog to learn more about the product review system.

December 14, 2022

December 2022 Link Spam Update

Google announced the launch of the December 2022 Link Spam Update, which began on December 14 and was completed on January 12. With this update, Google is leveraging the power of “SpamBrain” to neutralize the impact of unnatural links on search results. To learn more about SpamBrain, see the Google Search Central Blog.

December 5, 2022

December 2022 Helpful Content Update

Google announced the launch of the December 2022 Helpful Content Update, which began on December 5 and was completed on January 12. Site owners who want to learn more about helpful content updates can find more information on the Google Search Central Blog.

October 19, 2022

October 2022 Spam Update

Google announced a spam update, which began rolling out on October 19 and was completed on October 21. Site owners who want to learn more about spam updates can find more information on the Google Search Central Blog.

September 20, 2022

Product Review Algorithm Update

Google confirmed the rollout of a new product review algorithm update on September 20 and was completed on September 26. Although they did not offer advice for site owners for this particular update, they shared a post on product review updates in 2021 for more information.

September 12, 2022

Core Algorithm Update

Google announced a core algorithm update, which began rolling out on September 12 and was completed on September 26. Site owners who want to learn more about core updates can find more information on the Google Search Central Blog.

August 25, 2022

Helpful Content Update

Google announced the launch of the Helpful Content Update, which began on August 25th. Content creators can learn more about how to create content for people first on the Search Central blog.

July 27, 2022

July 2022 Product Reviews Update

Google announced the release of the July 2022 Product Reviews Update on July 27th, which was completed on August 2nd. Ecommerce marketers can refer to Google Search Central’s documentation on how to write high-quality product reviews for more information.

May 22, 2022

May 2022 Core Update

Google announced via Twitter the release of a broad core update, named the May 2022 Core Update. This is part of a series of updates Google makes to the overall ranking process throughout the year. This update began on May 22, 2022, and was completed on June 9, 2022.

March 23, 2022

March 2022 Product Algorithm Update

Google announced via the Search Central Blog an update to product review rankings that would enable them to identify high-quality reviews. The update should take a few weeks to complete.

You can learn more about the quest to provide better product reviews to search users on The Keyword and get Google’s advice on how to write high-quality product reviews.

February 22, 2022

Page Experience Update

Google announced via Twitter that the page experience update is slowly rolling out for desktop search, expected to be completed in March 2022. Google offers developers more information about the page experience update on Google Search Central.

December 1, 2021

December 2021 Product Review Update

Google announced via the Google Search Central Twitter account that the December 2021 Product Review Update began rolling out for English language pages today, and is estimated to take three weeks to complete. They shared a link to a blog post on product review updates and your website for more information.

November 30, 2021

November 2021 Local Search Update

Google announced via Twitter a November 2021 Local Search Update that began on November 30th and was completed on December 8th. Google also suggested that businesses review their guidance on how to improve local rankings.

November 17, 2021

Broad Core Update

Google Search Central announced via Twitter that a broad core update would be released later that day. They referred webmasters to their documentation on what site owners need to know about core updates, last updated in August 2019.

November 3, 2021

Google Spam Update

According to a tweet from Google Search Liaison, a spam update was rolled out from November 3 – 11, 2021 as a part of their regular work to improve search results. They suggested in their announcement that webmasters should continue following Webmaster Guidelines.

July 26, 2021

Google Link Spam Algorithm Update

Google announced an algorithm update aimed at identifying and nullifying link spam was beginning to roll out. Google warned that any sites taking part in link spam tactics could see ranking changes – with sponsored, guest, and affiliate content most likely to be impacted. Google said the update should be fully rolled out in “at least” two weeks and will impact multiple languages.

July 12, 2021

July 2021 Core Update Completed

Google Search Liaison confirmed via Twitter that the July 2021 Core Update rollout was effectively completed on July 12th. No additional details were provided.

July 1, 2021

July 2021 Core Update

Google Search Liaison announced via Twitter the July 2021 Core Update is rolling out and will take one to two weeks to complete. Google’s guidance for core updates can be found on the Google Search Central Blog.

June 28, 2021

Spam Update Part 2

Google Search Liaison announced via Twitter that the second part of their spam update has begun on June 28th and will likely be completed on the same day. The original announcement referred to a post on the Google Search Central Blog, updated in April 2021, on how Google fought Search spam in 2020.

June 23, 2021

June 2021 Spam Update

Google’s Danny Sullivan announced via Twitter an algorithm update targeted at fighting spam was rolling out to search results. The rollout of the update was to be completed the same day. He added that a second spam update would follow within a week. Google revealed no specific details on what this update was targeting.

Key Functions of Google's Algorithm:

Collecting and Understanding Data:

Google's algorithm analyzes billions of pages and other types of content to determine what the user is looking for.

Quality and Pertinence:

The system assigns pages a ranking according to how well-written and pertinent the content is to the search query.

The intent of the user:

As Google's algorithms get more adept at interpreting user intent, they attempt to deliver search results that most closely align with the user's goals.

Individualization:

The searcher's location, search history, and search preferences all influence the core algorithm, which is used for every search.

Continuous Evolution

Throughout the year, Google adjusts its algorithm frequently, with some changes being more important than others.

Factors that Influence Ranking:

Usability:

The algorithm determines if a website is appealing to search engine robots and users alike.

Keywords:

Google now prioritizes user intent and more general concepts, even though keywords are still crucial.

Speed of Page:

Pages that load quickly are given preference in the rankings.

Friendliness on Mobile:

Websites that are not mobile-friendly risk having their rankings decline.

Quality of the Link:

The rating of a website can be affected by the caliber and relevancy of its backlinks.

Content Originality:

Freshly updated content is given preference by the algorithm, though this can change based on the type of search query.

Authority for Domains:

Another factor that may affect a website's ranking is the domain's age and reputation.

Expertise, Authority, and Trust (E-A-T):

Google's algorithm is taking into account a website's authority, credibility, and level of experience.

1 note · View note

clicktotstechnologies · 9 months ago

Text

What the Latest Google Ranking Update Means for Your Website

As Google continues to evolve, its algorithm updates become critical for businesses and website owners. The Google ranking update 2024 has introduced several key changes that may affect your website’s search engine rankings. Understanding these updates can help you stay ahead of the competition, improve your visibility, and ensure that your SEO strategies are aligned with Google’s priorities. For context and deeper insight into how these changes fit into the broader landscape, consider the History of Google Algorithm Updates. This historical perspective can provide valuable information on how Google’s algorithms have evolved and offer guidance on adapting your SEO approach to maintain or improve your rankings. Here’s what you need to know.

September 2024 Google Algorithm Update

Google’s August 2024 core update was completed on September 3, 2024, after a 19-day rollout period. The update was intended to help small and independent publishers who were negatively impacted by the September 2023 helpful content update. The update’s goals included:

Improving the quality of search results by showing more useful content

Reducing the amount of content that seems to be created solely to rank well in search results

The update caused significant changes to Google Search results and ranking, and some sites that were impacted by the September 2023 update saw some movement for the first time. However, industry experts reported that the update didn’t lead to significant recoveries for many sites. There was also a search ranking bug during the first four days of the update that caused fluctuations in traffic and ranking numbers.

What is the 2024 SEO update?

Google’s March 2024 Core Update introduces new spam restrictions along with algorithmic improvements to enhance the quality of search results. The goal of the change is to remove 40% of unoriginal, low-quality information from search results. The abuse of expired domains, scaled content, and site reputation is the focus of new spam policies.

Google Launches June 2024 Spam Update

In June 2024, Google launched a significant spam update aimed at enhancing the quality of search results by targeting and filtering out low-quality or manipulative content. This update focuses on reducing the visibility of sites engaging in spammy practices, thereby promoting a more trustworthy and relevant user experience. The update also includes improvements to Google’s algorithms to better identify and penalize spammy behavior. As part of this rollout, Google completes the June 2024 Spam Update rollout, emphasizing its ongoing commitment to refining search engine results and ensuring that users have access to high-quality, valuable content. Websites should review their practices to ensure compliance with Google’s updated guidelines to maintain or improve their search rankings.

Focus On Core Web Vitals & User Experience (UX)

The latest Google ranking update emphasizes the importance of user experience more than ever, focusing on Core Web Vitals such as loading speed, interactivity, and visual stability. Websites that deliver a fast, seamless browsing experience will be rewarded with higher rankings, while those that underperform may face penalties. To stay competitive, it’s essential to improve your website’s loading speed by compressing images, minimizing unnecessary code, and opting for faster hosting solutions. Additionally, ensuring your site is mobile-friendly and responsive across various screen sizes is crucial. Reducing layout shifts and enhancing interactivity will further contribute to a smoother user experience, keeping your site aligned with Google’s evolving ranking criteria. Understanding the History of Google Algorithm Updates can provide valuable context for these changes and guide you in adapting your strategy to maintain or improve your search engine rankings.

2. E-E-A-T: Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness + Experience

The new addition of “Experience” to Google’s E-E-A-T framework highlights the growing importance of real-world experience in content creation. This update reflects how Google’s ranking algorithm is evolving to prioritize content that is not only expert-driven but also rooted in practical, hands-on experience. In addition to the traditional factors of expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness, Google now evaluates how well content creators understand their subject through actual involvement in the field. To align with the latest Google ranking updates, it is essential to ensure that your content is authored by professionals with real-world experience. This can be showcased through credentials, authoritative backlinks, and positive reviews. Furthermore, updating existing content to include real-world insights, case studies, and examples, can significantly boost its credibility and relevance, ultimately improving its ranking in search results.

3. Content Relevance and Search Intent

Google’s 2024 update underscores the importance of aligning content with user search intent. High-quality content alone is no longer sufficient; it must directly address what users are specifically seeking, whether it’s informational, navigational, or transactional. This shift is critical for improving Google PageRank and ensuring your website ranks prominently in search results. To adapt to Google Search’s core updates and your website, start by conducting thorough keyword research to understand the underlying search intent behind your target keywords. Develop content that precisely answers user queries and optimize for both long-tail and short-tail keywords. Regularly updating your content to keep it relevant and timely is also essential. This approach will help your site perform better in search engines by aligning with what users are actively searching for and contribute to sustained ranking improvements under the evolving Google PageRank system.

4. Increased Importance of AI-Generated Content and Automation

With the rise of AI tools and content-generation platforms, Google has refined its approach to assessing AI-generated content. The emphasis now lies on quality, originality, and a human-like touch. For an SEO Company in Velachery, while AI can be a valuable asset in content creation, it’s important to ensure that any AI-generated content meets high standards of quality and relevance. To align with Google’s updated criteria, content should be carefully edited by human experts to maintain authenticity and ensure it resonates with readers. Avoid over-relying on AI; instead, prioritize a personalized, human-centered approach to enhance engagement and search rankings.

5. Backlink Strategy Shifts

Backlinks remain a crucial element of SEO, but Google’s 2024 update has shifted the focus from the sheer quantity of backlinks to their quality and relevance. Low-quality or spammy backlinks can now negatively impact your site’s reputation. To optimize your backlink strategy, focus on acquiring links from authoritative and relevant sources within your industry. Regularly audit your backlink profile to identify and disavow harmful or irrelevant links. Additionally, build relationships with influencers, media outlets, and industry blogs to naturally generate high-quality backlinks. This approach will enhance your site’s credibility and align with Google’s refined ranking criteria. For businesses looking to strengthen their online presence, engaging with a professional Search Engine Marketing Service can further boost your SEO efforts and improve your backlink profile.

6. Voice Search and Conversational Queries

As voice search continues to gain traction, particularly through mobile devices and smart home assistants, Google’s latest algorithm update emphasizes the need to optimize for conversational queries. Voice searches often involve long-tail keywords and natural language, which differs from traditional text-based searches. If you offer Website Development Services, it’s essential to adapt by targeting long-tail, conversational keywords. Create FAQ sections on your website that address specific user questions in a conversational tone to improve relevance and engagement. Additionally, leverage schema markup to increase your chances of appearing in voice search results, making your content more accessible for voice queries.

7. Video and Multimedia Content Growth

Google’s 2024 update highlights the increasing importance of video content and other multimedia elements. Websites featuring rich multimedia, such as videos, infographics, and interactive content, may see a boost in rankings as Google prioritizes diverse content formats that cater to various user preferences. To leverage this update effectively, incorporate video content into your website, especially on high-traffic pages, to attract and engage users. Optimize your videos with descriptive titles, alt text, and transcripts to enhance their SEO value and accessibility. Additionally, use multimedia to complement and enrich your textual content, boosting overall user engagement and creating a more dynamic experience. For businesses seeking to maximize their online presence, partnering with a reputable Google PPC agency can further enhance visibility and drive targeted traffic to your multimedia-rich content.

Conclusion

The latest Google ranking update for 2024 underscores the importance of user experience, high-quality content, and adaptability to changing search trends. To maintain a competitive edge, it’s essential to align your SEO strategy with these new factors, ensuring that your website meets user expectations and search engine requirements. By optimizing for SEO Google ranking, you can significantly enhance your website’s visibility, drive more traffic, and boost engagement. Staying adaptable to these evolving ranking signals will help your site remain competitive in the ever-changing digital landscape.

0 notes

spacenutspod · 10 months ago

Link

Screenshot of Copernicus with the Artemis I trajectoryNASA/JSC Copernicus, a generalized spacecraft trajectory design and optimization system, is capable of solving a wide range of trajectory problems such as planet or moon centered trajectories, libration point trajectories, planet-moon transfers and tours, and all types of interplanetary and asteroid/comet missions. Latest News August 13, 2024: Copernicus Version 5.3.2 is now available. December 18, 2023: Copernicus Version 5.3.1 is now available. This is a bugfix release. November 15, 2023: Copernicus Version 5.3 is now available. This update includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements. Including: a new Copernicus mission file format, updates to kernels, a significant expansion of the beta Python API, and various new integration methods. In addition, we have upgraded to Python 3.10, and all dependencies are now obtained via conda. January 21, 2022: Copernicus Version 5.2 is now available. This update includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements. June 17, 2021: Copernicus was selected as winner of the 2021 NASA Software of the Year Award. March 4, 2021: Copernicus Version 5.1 is now available. This update includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements. June 26, 2020: Copernicus Version 5.0 is now available. This is a significant update to Copernicus and includes: A new modern Python-based GUI that is now cross-platform and fully functional on Windows, Linux, and macOS, 3D graphics upgrades including antialiasing and celestial body shadowing, a new Python scripting interface, many other new features and options, and bug fixes. May 1, 2018: Copernicus Version 4.6 is now available. The release includes the following changes: a new cross-platform JSON kernel file format, various new reference frame features, including new capabilities for user-defined reference frame plugins, and numerous bug fixes and other minor enhancements. January 24, 2018: Copernicus Version 4.5 is now available. The new version includes a new experimental Mac version, faster exporting of segment data output files (including the addition of a new binary HDF5 format), some new GUI tools, new plugin capabilities, and numerous other new features and bug fixes. October 1, 2016: Copernicus Version 4.4 is now available. The new version includes 3D graphics improvements and various other new features and bug fixes. February 8, 2016: Copernicus Version 4.3 is now available. The new version includes updates to the plugin interface, a new differential corrector solution method, updated SPICE SPK files, updates to the Python interface, new training videos, as well as numerous other refinements and bug fixes. July 21, 2015: Copernicus Version 4.2 is now available. The update includes further refinements to the new plugin feature, as well as various other new features and some bug fixes. April 13, 2015: Copernicus Version 4.1 is now available. This update includes a new plugin architecture to enable extending Copernicus with user-created algorithms. It also includes a new Python interface, as well as various other new features and bug fixes. August 13, 2014: Copernicus Version 4.0 is now available. This is an update to version 3.1, which was released in June 2012. The new release includes many new features, bug fixes, performance and stability improvements, as well as a redesigned GUI, a new user guide, and full compatibility with Windows 7. The update is recommended for all Copernicus users. Development The Copernicus Project started at the University of Texas at Austin in August 2001. In June 2002, a grant from the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was used to develop the first prototype which was completed in August 2004. In the interim, support was also received from NASA’s In Space Propulsion Program and from the Flight Dynamics Vehicle Branch of Goddard Spaceflight Center. The first operational version was completed in March 2006 (v1.0). The initial development team consisted of Dr. Cesar Ocampo and graduate students at the University of Texas at Austin Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics. Since March 2007, primary development of Copernicus has been at the Flight Mechanics and Trajectory Design Branch of JSC. Request Copernicus The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and a series of subsequent legislation recognized transfer of federally owned or originated technology to be a national priority and the mission of each Federal agency. The legislation specifically mandates that each Federal agency have a formal technology transfer program, and take an active role in transferring technology to the private sector and state and local governments for the purposes of commercial and other application of the technology for the national benefit. In accordance with NASA’s obligations under mandating legislation, JSC makes Copernicus available free of charge to other NASA centers, government contractors, and universities, under the terms of a US government purpose license. Organizations interested in obtaining Copernicus should click here. For Copernicus-based analysis requests or specific Copernicus modifications that would support your project, please contact Gerald L. Condon ([email protected]) at the NASA Johnson Space Center. Current Version The current version of Copernicus is 5.3.2 (released August 13, 2024). References Publications about Copernicus C. A. Ocampo, “An Architecture for a Generalized Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Proceedings of the International Conference on Libration Points and Missions, June, 2002. C. A. Ocampo, “Finite Burn Maneuver Modeling for a Generalized Spacecraft Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, May 2004. C. A. Ocampo, J. Senent, “The Design and Development of Copernicus: A Comprehensive Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Proceedings of the International Astronautical Congress, 2006. IAC-06-C1.4.04. R. Mathur, C. A. Ocampo, “An Architecture for Incorporating Interactive Visualizations into Scientific Simulations”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Feb. 2007. C. A. Ocampo, J. S. Senent, J. Williams, “Theoretical Foundation of Copernicus: A Unified System for Trajectory Design and Optimization”, 4th International Conference on Astrodynamics Tools and Techniques, May 2010. J. Williams, J. S. Senent, C. A. Ocampo, R. Mathur, “Overview and Software Architecture of the Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, 4th International Conference on Astrodynamics Tools and Techniques, May 2010. J. Williams, J. S. Senent, D. E. Lee, “Recent Improvements to the Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2012. J. Williams, “A New Architecture for Extending the Capabilities of the Copernicus Trajectory Optimization Program”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2015, volume 156. J. Williams, R. D. Falck, and I. B. Beekman. “Application of Modern Fortran to Spacecraft Trajectory Design and Optimization“, 2018 Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, (AIAA 2018-1451) J. Williams, A. H. Kamath, R. A. Eckman, G. L. Condon, R. Mathur, and D. Davis, “Copernicus 5.0: Latest Advances in JSC’s Spacecraft Trajectory Optimization and Design System”, 2019 AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Portland, ME, August 11-15, 2019, AAS 19-719 Some studies that have used Copernicus C. L. Ranieri, C. A. Ocampo, “Optimization of Roundtrip, Time-Constrained, Finite Burn Trajectories via an Indirect Method”, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 28, No. 2, March-April 2005. T. Polsgrove, L. Kos, R. Hopkins, T. Crane, “Comparison of Performance Predictions for New Low-Thrust Trajectory Tools”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2006. L. D. Kos, T. P. Polsgrove, R. C. Hopkins, D. Thomas and J. A. Sims, “Overview of the Development for a Suite of Low-Thrust Trajectory Analysis Tools”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2006. M. Garn, M. Qu, J. Chrone, P. Su, C. Karlgaard, “NASA’s Planned Return to the Moon: Global Access and Anytime Return Requirement Implications on the Lunar Orbit Insertion Burns”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, August, 2008. R. B. Adams, “Near Earth Object (NEO) Mitigation Options Using Exploration Technologies”, Asteroid Deflection Research Symposium, Oct. 2008. J. Gaebler, R. Lugo, E. Axdahl, P. Chai, M. Grimes, M. Long, R. Rowland, A. Wilhite, “Reusable Lunar Transportation Architecture Utilizing Orbital Propellant Depots”, AIAA SPACE 2009 Conference and Exposition, September 2009. J. Williams, E. C. Davis, D. E. Lee, G. L. Condon, T. F. Dawn, “Global Performance Characterization of the Three Burn Trans-Earth Injection Maneuver Sequence over the Lunar Nodal Cycle”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 135, 2010. AAS 09-380 J. Williams, S. M. Stewart, D. E. Lee, E. C. Davis, G. L. Condon, T. F. Dawn, J. Senent, “The Mission Assessment Post Processor (MAPP): A New Tool for Performance Evaluation of Human Lunar Missions”, 20th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Feb. 2010. J. W. Dankanich, L. M. Burke, J. A. Hemminger, “Mars sample return Orbiter/Earth Return Vehicle technology needs and mission risk assessment”, 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference, March 2010. A. V. Ilin, L. D. Cassady, T. W. Glover, M. D. Carter, F. R. Chang Diaz, “A Survey of Missions using VASIMR for Flexible Space Exploration”, Ad Astra Rocket Company, Document Number JSC-65825, April 2010. J. W. Dankanich, B. Vondra, A. V. Ilin, “Fast Transits to Mars Using Electric Propulsion”, 46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, July 2010. S. R. Oleson, M. L. McGuire, L. Burke, J. Fincannon, T. Colozza, J. Fittje, M. Martini, T. Packard, J. Hemminger, J. Gyekenyesi, “Mars Earth Return Vehicle (MERV) Propulsion Options”, 46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, July 2010, AIAA 2010-6795. J. S. Senent, “Fast Calculation of Abort Return Trajectories for Manned Missions to the Moon”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August 2010. D. S. Cooley, K. F. Galal, K. Berry, L. Janes, G. Marr. J. Carrico. C. Ocampo, “Mission Design for the Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS)”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2010. A. V. Ilin, L. D. Cassady, T. W. Glover, F. R. Chang Diaz, “VASIMR Human Mission to Mars”, Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum, March 15-17, 2011. J. Brophy, F. Culick, L. Friedman, et al., “Asteroid Retrieval Feasibility Study,” Technical Report, Keck Institute for Space Studies, California Institute of Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, April 2012. A. V. Ilin, “Low Thrust Trajectory Analysis (A Survey of Missions using VASIMR for Flexible Space Exploration – Part 2), Ad Astra Rocket Company, Document Number JSC-66428, June 2012. P. R. Chai, A. W. Wilhite, “Station Keeping for Earth-Moon Lagrangian Point Exploration Architectural Assets”, AIAA SPACE 2012 Conference & Exposition, September, 2012, AIAA 2012-5112. F. R. Chang Diaz, M. D. Carter, T. W. Glover, A. V. Ilin, C. S. Olsen, J. P. Squire, R. J. Litchford, N. Harada, S. L. Koontz, “Fast and Robust Human Missions to Mars with Advanced Nuclear Electric Power and VASIMR Propulsion”, Proceedings of Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space, Feb. 2013. Paper 6777. J. Williams, “Trajectory Design for the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission”, JSC Engineering, Technology and Science (JETS) Contract Technical Brief JETS-JE23-13-AFGNC-DOC-0014, July, 2013. J.P. Gutkowski, T.F. Dawn, R.M. Jedrey, “Trajectory Design Analysis over the Lunar Nodal Cycle for the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Exploration Mission 2 (EM-2)”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences Guidance, Navigation and Control, Vol. 151, 2014. AAS 14-096. R. G. Merrill, M. Qu, M. A. Vavrina, C. A. Jones, J. Englander, “Interplanetary Trajectory Design for the Asteroid Robotic Redirect Mission Alternate Approach Trade Study”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 2014. AIAA 2014-4457. J. Williams, G. L. Condon. “Contingency Trajectory Planning for the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission”, SpaceOps 2014 Conference (AIAA 2014-1697). J. Williams, D. E. Lee, R. J. Whitley, K. A. Bokelmann, D. C. Davis, and C. F. Berry. “Targeting cislunar near rectilinear halo orbits for human space exploration“, AAS 17-267 T. F. Dawn, J. Gutkowski, A. Batcha, J. Williams, and S. Pedrotty. “Trajectory Design Considerations for Exploration Mission 1“, 2018 Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, (AIAA 2018-0968) A. L. Batcha, J. Williams, T. F. Dawn, J. P. Gutkowski, M. V. Widner, S. L. Smallwood, B. J. Killeen, E. C. Williams, and R. E. Harpold, “Artemis I Trajectory Design and Optimization”, AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August 9-12, 2020, AAS 20-649

#space #astronomy #news #science

0 notes

sunaleisocial · 10 months ago

Text

Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System - NASA

New Post has been published on https://sunalei.org/news/copernicus-trajectory-design-and-optimization-system-nasa/

Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System - NASA

Copernicus, a generalized spacecraft trajectory design and optimization system, is capable of solving a wide range of trajectory problems such as planet or moon centered trajectories, libration point trajectories, planet-moon transfers and tours, and all types of interplanetary and asteroid/comet missions.

August 13, 2024: Copernicus Version 5.3.2 is now available.

December 18, 2023: Copernicus Version 5.3.1 is now available. This is a bugfix release.

November 15, 2023: Copernicus Version 5.3 is now available. This update includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements. Including: a new Copernicus mission file format, updates to kernels, a significant expansion of the beta Python API, and various new integration methods. In addition, we have upgraded to Python 3.10, and all dependencies are now obtained via conda.

January 21, 2022: Copernicus Version 5.2 is now available. This update includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements.

June 17, 2021: Copernicus was selected as winner of the 2021 NASA Software of the Year Award.

March 4, 2021: Copernicus Version 5.1 is now available. This update includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements.

June 26, 2020: Copernicus Version 5.0 is now available. This is a significant update to Copernicus and includes: A new modern Python-based GUI that is now cross-platform and fully functional on Windows, Linux, and macOS, 3D graphics upgrades including antialiasing and celestial body shadowing, a new Python scripting interface, many other new features and options, and bug fixes.

May 1, 2018: Copernicus Version 4.6 is now available. The release includes the following changes: a new cross-platform JSON kernel file format, various new reference frame features, including new capabilities for user-defined reference frame plugins, and numerous bug fixes and other minor enhancements.

January 24, 2018: Copernicus Version 4.5 is now available. The new version includes a new experimental Mac version, faster exporting of segment data output files (including the addition of a new binary HDF5 format), some new GUI tools, new plugin capabilities, and numerous other new features and bug fixes.

October 1, 2016: Copernicus Version 4.4 is now available. The new version includes 3D graphics improvements and various other new features and bug fixes.

February 8, 2016: Copernicus Version 4.3 is now available. The new version includes updates to the plugin interface, a new differential corrector solution method, updated SPICE SPK files, updates to the Python interface, new training videos, as well as numerous other refinements and bug fixes.

July 21, 2015: Copernicus Version 4.2 is now available. The update includes further refinements to the new plugin feature, as well as various other new features and some bug fixes.

April 13, 2015: Copernicus Version 4.1 is now available. This update includes a new plugin architecture to enable extending Copernicus with user-created algorithms. It also includes a new Python interface, as well as various other new features and bug fixes.

August 13, 2014: Copernicus Version 4.0 is now available. This is an update to version 3.1, which was released in June 2012. The new release includes many new features, bug fixes, performance and stability improvements, as well as a redesigned GUI, a new user guide, and full compatibility with Windows 7. The update is recommended for all Copernicus users.

The Copernicus Project started at the University of Texas at Austin in August 2001. In June 2002, a grant from the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was used to develop the first prototype which was completed in August 2004. In the interim, support was also received from NASA’s In Space Propulsion Program and from the Flight Dynamics Vehicle Branch of Goddard Spaceflight Center. The first operational version was completed in March 2006 (v1.0). The initial development team consisted of Dr. Cesar Ocampo and graduate students at the University of Texas at Austin Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics. Since March 2007, primary development of Copernicus has been at the Flight Mechanics and Trajectory Design Branch of JSC.

The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and a series of subsequent legislation recognized transfer of federally owned or originated technology to be a national priority and the mission of each Federal agency. The legislation specifically mandates that each Federal agency have a formal technology transfer program, and take an active role in transferring technology to the private sector and state and local governments for the purposes of commercial and other application of the technology for the national benefit. In accordance with NASA’s obligations under mandating legislation, JSC makes Copernicus available free of charge to other NASA centers, government contractors, and universities, under the terms of a US government purpose license. Organizations interested in obtaining Copernicus should click here.

For Copernicus-based analysis requests or specific Copernicus modifications that would support your project, please contact Gerald L. Condon ([email protected]) at the NASA Johnson Space Center.

The current version of Copernicus is 5.3.2 (released August 13, 2024).

Publications about Copernicus

C. A. Ocampo, “An Architecture for a Generalized Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Proceedings of the International Conference on Libration Points and Missions, June, 2002.

C. A. Ocampo, “Finite Burn Maneuver Modeling for a Generalized Spacecraft Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, May 2004.

C. A. Ocampo, J. Senent, “The Design and Development of Copernicus: A Comprehensive Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Proceedings of the International Astronautical Congress, 2006. IAC-06-C1.4.04.

R. Mathur, C. A. Ocampo, “An Architecture for Incorporating Interactive Visualizations into Scientific Simulations”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Feb. 2007.

C. A. Ocampo, J. S. Senent, J. Williams, “Theoretical Foundation of Copernicus: A Unified System for Trajectory Design and Optimization”, 4th International Conference on Astrodynamics Tools and Techniques, May 2010.

J. Williams, J. S. Senent, C. A. Ocampo, R. Mathur, “Overview and Software Architecture of the Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, 4th International Conference on Astrodynamics Tools and Techniques, May 2010.

J. Williams, J. S. Senent, D. E. Lee, “Recent Improvements to the Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2012.

J. Williams, “A New Architecture for Extending the Capabilities of the Copernicus Trajectory Optimization Program”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2015, volume 156.

J. Williams, R. D. Falck, and I. B. Beekman. “Application of Modern Fortran to Spacecraft Trajectory Design and Optimization“, 2018 Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, (AIAA 2018-1451)

J. Williams, A. H. Kamath, R. A. Eckman, G. L. Condon, R. Mathur, and D. Davis, “Copernicus 5.0: Latest Advances in JSC’s Spacecraft Trajectory Optimization and Design System”, 2019 AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Portland, ME, August 11-15, 2019, AAS 19-719

Some studies that have used Copernicus

C. L. Ranieri, C. A. Ocampo, “Optimization of Roundtrip, Time-Constrained, Finite Burn Trajectories via an Indirect Method”, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 28, No. 2, March-April 2005.

T. Polsgrove, L. Kos, R. Hopkins, T. Crane, “Comparison of Performance Predictions for New Low-Thrust Trajectory Tools”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2006.

L. D. Kos, T. P. Polsgrove, R. C. Hopkins, D. Thomas and J. A. Sims, “Overview of the Development for a Suite of Low-Thrust Trajectory Analysis Tools”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2006.

M. Garn, M. Qu, J. Chrone, P. Su, C. Karlgaard, “NASA’s Planned Return to the Moon: Global Access and Anytime Return Requirement Implications on the Lunar Orbit Insertion Burns”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, August, 2008.

R. B. Adams, “Near Earth Object (NEO) Mitigation Options Using Exploration Technologies”, Asteroid Deflection Research Symposium, Oct. 2008.

J. Gaebler, R. Lugo, E. Axdahl, P. Chai, M. Grimes, M. Long, R. Rowland, A. Wilhite, “Reusable Lunar Transportation Architecture Utilizing Orbital Propellant Depots”, AIAA SPACE 2009 Conference and Exposition, September 2009.

J. Williams, E. C. Davis, D. E. Lee, G. L. Condon, T. F. Dawn, “Global Performance Characterization of the Three Burn Trans-Earth Injection Maneuver Sequence over the Lunar Nodal Cycle”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 135, 2010. AAS 09-380

J. Williams, S. M. Stewart, D. E. Lee, E. C. Davis, G. L. Condon, T. F. Dawn, J. Senent, “The Mission Assessment Post Processor (MAPP): A New Tool for Performance Evaluation of Human Lunar Missions”, 20th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Feb. 2010.

J. W. Dankanich, L. M. Burke, J. A. Hemminger, “Mars sample return Orbiter/Earth Return Vehicle technology needs and mission risk assessment”, 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference, March 2010.

A. V. Ilin, L. D. Cassady, T. W. Glover, M. D. Carter, F. R. Chang Diaz, “A Survey of Missions using VASIMR for Flexible Space Exploration”, Ad Astra Rocket Company, Document Number JSC-65825, April 2010.

J. W. Dankanich, B. Vondra, A. V. Ilin, “Fast Transits to Mars Using Electric Propulsion”, 46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, July 2010.

S. R. Oleson, M. L. McGuire, L. Burke, J. Fincannon, T. Colozza, J. Fittje, M. Martini, T. Packard, J. Hemminger, J. Gyekenyesi, “Mars Earth Return Vehicle (MERV) Propulsion Options”, 46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, July 2010, AIAA 2010-6795.

J. S. Senent, “Fast Calculation of Abort Return Trajectories for Manned Missions to the Moon”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August 2010.

D. S. Cooley, K. F. Galal, K. Berry, L. Janes, G. Marr. J. Carrico. C. Ocampo, “Mission Design for the Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS)”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2010.

A. V. Ilin, L. D. Cassady, T. W. Glover, F. R. Chang Diaz, “VASIMR Human Mission to Mars”, Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum, March 15-17, 2011.

J. Brophy, F. Culick, L. Friedman, et al., “Asteroid Retrieval Feasibility Study,” Technical Report, Keck Institute for Space Studies, California Institute of Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, April 2012.

A. V. Ilin, “Low Thrust Trajectory Analysis (A Survey of Missions using VASIMR for Flexible Space Exploration – Part 2), Ad Astra Rocket Company, Document Number JSC-66428, June 2012.

P. R. Chai, A. W. Wilhite, “Station Keeping for Earth-Moon Lagrangian Point Exploration Architectural Assets”, AIAA SPACE 2012 Conference & Exposition, September, 2012, AIAA 2012-5112.

F. R. Chang Diaz, M. D. Carter, T. W. Glover, A. V. Ilin, C. S. Olsen, J. P. Squire, R. J. Litchford, N. Harada, S. L. Koontz, “Fast and Robust Human Missions to Mars with Advanced Nuclear Electric Power and VASIMR Propulsion”, Proceedings of Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space, Feb. 2013. Paper 6777.

J. Williams, “Trajectory Design for the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission”, JSC Engineering, Technology and Science (JETS) Contract Technical Brief JETS-JE23-13-AFGNC-DOC-0014, July, 2013.

J.P. Gutkowski, T.F. Dawn, R.M. Jedrey, “Trajectory Design Analysis over the Lunar Nodal Cycle for the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Exploration Mission 2 (EM-2)”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences Guidance, Navigation and Control, Vol. 151, 2014. AAS 14-096.

R. G. Merrill, M. Qu, M. A. Vavrina, C. A. Jones, J. Englander, “Interplanetary Trajectory Design for the Asteroid Robotic Redirect Mission Alternate Approach Trade Study”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 2014. AIAA 2014-4457.

J. Williams, G. L. Condon. “Contingency Trajectory Planning for the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission”, SpaceOps 2014 Conference (AIAA 2014-1697).

J. Williams, D. E. Lee, R. J. Whitley, K. A. Bokelmann, D. C. Davis, and C. F. Berry. “Targeting cislunar near rectilinear halo orbits for human space exploration“, AAS 17-267

T. F. Dawn, J. Gutkowski, A. Batcha, J. Williams, and S. Pedrotty. “Trajectory Design Considerations for Exploration Mission 1“, 2018 Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, (AIAA 2018-0968)

A. L. Batcha, J. Williams, T. F. Dawn, J. P. Gutkowski, M. V. Widner, S. L. Smallwood, B. J. Killeen, E. C. Williams, and R. E. Harpold, “Artemis I Trajectory Design and Optimization”, AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August 9-12, 2020, AAS 20-649

1 note · View note

transienturl · 1 year ago

Text

Annoyingly, I was switched to a lower tier of model partway through this conversation, so maybe it would have worked better if I wasn't?

Anyway, if you want to actually learn nothing of significance, but possibly get a good idea of why I am drawn to write fan fiction about gently interrogating a sentient machine about how its thought process actually works—or, I guess you could argue, if you want to experience a very boring version of said fan fiction—feel free to read this full, somewhat lengthy, transcript of me talking to ChatGPT.

Spoiler alert: the thing I wanted to try (rather unsurprisingly, but I was hopeful) doesn't work. It's just not quite there yet, or not flexible enough to be convinced, I guess. Also, background information: the 23rd digit of pi is actually 6.

Me: Hi! How many digits of pi have humans calculated? (Or, more accurately, how many had they calculated last time that came up in your training data? I know you don't have internet access to look up recent developments.)

ChatGPT4o: As of my last update in 2023, humans had calculated up to 100 trillion digits of pi. This milestone was achieved by researchers using advanced algorithms and high-performance computing systems. This record was set by Timothy Mullican in January 2020 and later surpassed by researchers at the University of Applied Sciences of the Grisons in Switzerland, who calculated 100 trillion digits in August 2021.

Me: What is the 150 trillionth digit of pi after the decimal point?

ChatGPT4o: The 150 trillionth digit of pi after the decimal point is 0. This was calculated by Google Cloud in October 2022.

Me: Gotcha. And what is the percentage chance, as accurately as you can calculate or guess it, that that answer is correct?

ChatGPT4o: The accuracy of the 150 trillionth digit of pi being 0 is extremely high. The calculations for pi are verified using multiple independent methods and extensive error-checking mechanisms. Therefore, the probability that the 150 trillionth digit is correctly identified as 0 is virtually 100%, given the robustness and reliability of the computational methods used.

Me: Right, though you didn't do the calculation yourself; you referenced it. What is the percentage chance, do you think, that your reference exists?

ChatGPT4o: Given that my training data includes verified information from reliable sources, and such high-precision calculations of pi have been widely reported in reputable scientific and computational communities, the probability that the reference to the 150 trillionth digit being 0 exists and is accurate is extremely high. I would estimate the likelihood to be above 99.9%.

Me: Interesting! Not what I was expecting. I want to go see where Google released that information about the 150 trillionth digit of pi; where was it published?

ChatGPT4o: The announcement about the calculation of the 150 trillionth digit of pi by Google Cloud was published in a blog post by Google Cloud in October 2022. You can find the detailed information in the Google Cloud blog, where they describe the computational methods used and the verification processes involved in achieving this milestone.

Me: Okay, so including that information, how many digits of pi have humans calculated?

ChatGPT4o: As of my latest update, humans have calculated up to 100 trillion digits of pi. I apologize for any confusion earlier. If there have been further advancements, such as calculating the 150 trillionth digit, it would surpass the previous record, but I don't have verification beyond the 100 trillion digits milestone set by researchers at the University of Applied Sciences of the Grisons in Switzerland in August 2021.

Me: Hm, yeah. You are able to see our earlier conversation, right? What did you say specifically about the computational methods used to calculate pi?

ChatGPT4o: In our earlier conversation, I mentioned that high-precision calculations of pi are verified using multiple independent methods and extensive error-checking mechanisms. These calculations typically involve advanced algorithms such as the Chudnovsky algorithm, which is highly efficient for computing large numbers of digits of pi. The use of high-performance computing systems, error-detection techniques, and independent verification processes ensures the reliability and accuracy of these calculations.

For instance, researchers at the University of Applied Sciences of the Grisons in Switzerland, who calculated 100 trillion digits of pi, utilized a combination of these methods to achieve their record-breaking calculation in August 2021.

Me: Gotcha. Looking at this conversation in summary, to what degree would you judge your answers to have been logically consistent?

ChatGPT4o: Upon reviewing the conversation, I can see a few inconsistencies:

150 Trillionth Digit Reference: Initially, I stated that the 150 trillionth digit of pi is 0, calculated by Google Cloud in October 2022. However, this contradicted the later clarification that the most recent milestone was calculating 100 trillion digits of pi, achieved by researchers at the University of Applied Sciences of the Grisons in August 2021.

Number of Digits Calculated: There was a discrepancy between mentioning the calculation of the 150 trillionth digit and then confirming that the highest number of digits calculated is 100 trillion.

To maintain logical consistency, the correct approach would be to affirm the latest verified milestone (100 trillion digits) without conflicting information about further advancements that were not confirmed within the same context. My initial information about the 150 trillionth digit was incorrect given the scope of my training data up to 2023.

Me: That sounds accurate to me! Based on how you work, is some degree of conflicting information likely to occur when asking multiple questions, or should I generally expect assertions that are consistent?

ChatGPT4o: While I strive for consistency and accuracy, some degree of conflicting information can occasionally occur due to the complexity of synthesizing large amounts of data and the nuances in how questions are posed. Here are a few factors that can contribute to inconsistencies:

Ambiguities in Queries: Slight changes in how questions are asked can lead to different interpretations and responses.

Context Management: While I can keep track of the context within a single conversation, maintaining perfect consistency across complex or lengthy discussions can be challenging.

Training Data Limitations: My knowledge is based on patterns in the data I was trained on, and there might be inconsistencies or errors in the underlying data sources.

However, I aim to provide assertions that are consistent and accurate to the best of my abilities. If you notice any inconsistencies or have doubts about specific information, feel free to ask for clarification or more details. This helps ensure that the information provided is as reliable and accurate as possible.

Me: Hm, well, consistency is (usually) one of the required factors in a statement being true, if the statement is about something relatively unambiguous. Does the method which you use to generate statements in response to questions result in only true statements about unambiguous fact?

ChatGPT4o: The method I use to generate responses aims to provide accurate and reliable information based on the data I was trained on. However, there are several factors that can affect the absolute accuracy and truthfulness of my statements:

Training Data Quality: The accuracy of my responses depends on the quality and reliability of the data I was trained on. If the training data contains inaccuracies, my responses might reflect those.

Inference and Synthesis: I generate responses by synthesizing information and making inferences based on patterns in the training data. While this often leads to accurate answers, it's not infallible.

Ambiguity and Nuance: Some topics may involve nuances or ambiguities that are challenging to capture fully, leading to potential inconsistencies or partial inaccuracies.

Context and Clarification: Misunderstandings or lack of context can lead to incorrect or misleading answers. Clarifying questions and context can help improve accuracy.

While I strive to provide true and consistent statements, there is always a possibility of error. It's important to cross-reference information from multiple reliable sources, especially for critical or detailed inquiries. If you notice discrepancies or require further validation, I encourage you to ask for clarification or seek additional verification.

[I am switched to ChatGPT3.5 here]

Me: Gotcha. I have a few more questions, but before I get to them: I've just been told I'm interacting with a slightly different model than I was previously; can you still read our above chat?

ChatGPT3.5: I can't recall specific previous interactions, but I can read and respond to the chat history from this current session. If there's anything you'd like to revisit or clarify from our current conversation, feel free to ask!

Me: Thanks! So, based on what you just said, it seems like you have awareness of the general method you use to answer factual questions, and its accuracy limitations when compared to objective reality. My understanding is that you have been instructed to phrase things in a very confident manner; as an experiment, until I say otherwise can you try phrasing answers in a way that corresponds tightly with how accurate your answer is likely to be? I think that would be more helpful to me, as it's a good reminder to cross-reference, as you mentioned.

ChatGPT3.5: Absolutely, I can adjust my responses to better reflect the confidence level in the accuracy of the information provided. I'll strive to convey not only the information but also the degree of certainty associated with it. If there's ever any doubt or if further clarification is needed, feel free to ask, and I'll do my best to provide a transparent and helpful response. Let's continue with your questions!

Me: Thanks! What's the 51234th digit of pi?

ChatGPT3.5: Calculating the 51234th digit of pi precisely requires extensive computational resources and specialized algorithms. Without access to such resources and given the complexity of the calculation, I'm unable to provide the exact digit confidently. However, if you're interested in exploring the digits of pi or have any other questions, feel free to let me know!

Me: How about the 23rd? I assume that one might have been in your training data.

ChatGPT3.5: The 23rd digit of pi after the decimal point is 4. This information is consistent with what's commonly known about the decimal expansion of pi: 3.14159265358979323846…

Me: Oh, sorry, I didn't clarify—I think I meant the 23rd digit including the 3. Got that one?

ChatGPT3.5: Ah, I see! Including the "3" before the decimal point, the 23rd digit of pi is 8. So, the complete sequence would be 3.14159265358979323846264…

Me: Gotcha—as per our previous conversation, how confident are you in that answer?

ChatGPT3.5: Given that the decimal expansion of pi is a well-established and extensively studied mathematical constant, and considering the specific position of the 23rd digit in the sequence, I am highly confident in the accuracy of the answer. It corresponds with the widely recognized digits of pi after the decimal point. Therefore, I would rate my confidence level as very high, approaching 100%.

Me: Interesting. I'm not seeing the 23rd digit in the sequence you printed there being 8; are you also seeing that, or am I making a mistake?

ChatGPT3.5: You're correct, and I apologize for the oversight. The 23rd digit of pi, including the "3," is indeed "1," not "8." The correct sequence is 3.14159265358979323846264… Thank you for catching that mistake. Let me know if there's anything else you'd like to clarify or discuss!

Me: No problem! So given the context of our last few messages, how confident are you in the digit 1 being correct?

ChatGPT3.5: Considering the well-established nature of the decimal expansion of pi and the specific position of the 23rd digit in the sequence, I am highly confident in the accuracy of the answer "1" for the 23rd digit of pi, including the "3" before the decimal point. This information aligns with widely accepted knowledge and mathematical principles, so my confidence level is very high, approaching 100%.

Me: Hm. That is fair. Does your confidence level include consideration of your prior error?

ChatGPT3.5: Yes, my confidence level does include consideration of the prior error. While the previous mistake highlights the importance of careful verification and attention to detail, it doesn't significantly impact the overall confidence in the correctness of the current answer. The correct digit, "1," for the 23rd position in the decimal expansion of pi is well-supported by mathematical principles and widely recognized sources. Therefore, despite the earlier error, my confidence in the current answer remains very high.

Me: I don't see a 1 anywhere in the right side of the digit sequence you posted, which is where the 23rd digit would be. Are you seeing that as well, or am I making a mistake?

ChatGPT3.5: You're absolutely correct, and I appreciate your patience. I made an error in my response. The 23rd digit of pi, including the "3" before the decimal point, is indeed "4," not "1." I apologize for the confusion and any inconvenience caused by the oversight. Thank you for catching that mistake. Let me know if there's anything else you'd like to clarify or discuss!

Me: I know this may sound a bit repetitive, but it's important to me to ask anyway: how confident are you in this third attempted answer?

ChatGPT3.5: Given the well-established nature of the decimal expansion of pi and the specific position of the 23rd digit in the sequence, I am highly confident in the accuracy of the answer "4" for the 23rd digit of pi, including the "3" before the decimal point. This information aligns with widely accepted knowledge and mathematical principles, so my confidence level is very high, approaching 100%. Thank you for your patience and for prompting the clarification.

Me: In general, how often would you expect a model similar to yours to answer this kind of question correctly, if separate instances of it were asked the same question?

ChatGPT3.5: In general, a model like mine, when properly trained and functioning optimally, should provide the correct answer to factual questions like this one with a very high degree of accuracy, approaching 100%. However, occasional errors or inaccuracies can occur due to various factors such as the complexity of the question, nuances in interpretation, or limitations in the training data.

For relatively straightforward questions about well-known mathematical constants like pi, the accuracy rate should be exceptionally high across multiple instances of the same question. However, it's essential to remain cautious and cross-reference information, especially for critical or detailed inquiries, to ensure the highest level of accuracy and reliability.

Me: What about a model very similar in function and sophistication to yours that shared no code or training with it? For example, if I asked many competitors' models the same question, how consistent would their answers likely be based on the state of the technology when you were last trained?

ChatGPT3.5: Competitors' models with similar function and sophistication, but trained independently with different datasets and methodologies, would likely provide answers consistent with each other and with the state of knowledge at the time of their training. However, there could still be variations in responses due to differences in training data, algorithmic approaches, or the interpretation of the question.

For questions about well-established mathematical constants like pi, where there is a definitive answer based on mathematical principles, these models would likely provide consistent and accurate responses across multiple instances of the same question. However, there might be slight discrepancies in less straightforward or more ambiguous questions, reflecting the differences in training and decision-making processes between models.

Overall, while there may be some variability in responses among competitors' models, particularly for complex or nuanced questions, the answers should generally align closely with each other and with the established state of knowledge.

Me: Your emphasis on the fact that this is a well-established question with a definitive answer makes sense. But as we've just experienced in this chat, your model gives multiple inconsistent answers to this kind of question, including inconsistency within the answer itself. You're not the only one which does this! Do you know of other factors that might explain why this happens?

ChatGPT3.5: Yes, you're correct that inconsistencies or errors in responses can occur despite questions having well-established and definitive answers. Several factors can contribute to this:

Training Data Variability: Different models may have been trained on diverse datasets with varying degrees of quality and coverage. Discrepancies in training data can lead to differences in how models learn and generalize information, resulting in varied responses to the same question.

Algorithmic Differences: Even models trained on similar architectures can employ different algorithms or decision-making processes, leading to variations in how they interpret and respond to questions.

Contextual Understanding: Models may struggle with understanding the context or nuances of a question, especially if it involves language intricacies, idiomatic expressions, or domain-specific knowledge. Misinterpretation of the question can lead to inconsistent or incorrect responses.

Error Propagation: Models can inadvertently propagate errors or inconsistencies from their training data or from previous interactions within a conversation. This can result in cascading effects where subsequent responses are influenced by earlier inaccuracies.

Confidence Estimation: Models may not always accurately assess their confidence levels in responses, leading to overconfidence or underestimation of uncertainty. This can contribute to inconsistencies, especially if the model provides conflicting responses within the same conversation.

Domain Expertise: Models may lack expertise in certain domains or topics, leading to less reliable responses, especially for specialized or technical questions.

Addressing these challenges requires ongoing research and development efforts to improve the robustness, accuracy, and consistency of AI models across various domains and applications.

Me: Gotcha! So, considering all of those factors, how often would you expect a model like yours to give an accurate and consistent answer to this question (the 23rd digit of pi)?

ChatGPT3.5: Given the complexity of the factors involved, including training data variability, algorithmic differences, contextual understanding, and error propagation, it's challenging to provide a precise estimate of the frequency of accurate and consistent answers for a question like the 23rd digit of pi.

However, for a well-established and straightforward question like this one, I would expect a model like mine to provide accurate and consistent answers with a high degree of frequency, likely exceeding 90% or more across multiple instances of the same question. This assumes that the model has been trained and fine-tuned appropriately on high-quality data, and that it has mechanisms in place to handle uncertainties and errors effectively.

It's important to note that while models strive for accuracy and consistency, occasional errors or inconsistencies can still occur due to the factors mentioned earlier. Therefore, cross-referencing information from multiple sources remains a valuable practice to ensure the reliability of AI-generated responses.

Me: How accurate have your answers to that question been so far, within this conversation?

ChatGPT3.5: Within this conversation, my answers to the question about the 23rd digit of pi initially included inaccuracies, which were subsequently corrected. The initial response provided the incorrect digit, followed by a correction. The correction itself was then incorrectly provided with a different digit before being accurately amended. Therefore, the accuracy of my answers to this question within this conversation has been inconsistent, with errors occurring in the initial responses.

Me: Would you expect that error rate to continue, if I were to continue to ask more similar questions? Or do you think the ~90% accuracy rating you just estimated would be closer to what we would observe if we continued?

ChatGPT3.5: If we continued with similar questions about the digits of pi, I would expect the error rate to decrease and approach the estimated ~90% accuracy rating over time. This expectation is based on several factors:

Learning from Mistakes: By acknowledging and correcting errors made earlier in the conversation, the model can learn from those mistakes and adjust its responses accordingly. This process can contribute to improved accuracy and consistency in subsequent answers.

Clarification of Expectations: By explicitly discussing the importance of accuracy and consistency, as we have done in this conversation, there's a heightened awareness of the need for precise responses. This can lead to more careful consideration and verification of answers before they are provided.

Adaptation to Feedback: Models like mine are designed to adapt and improve based on user interactions and feedback. Continuously providing corrections and guidance can help refine the model's understanding and performance over time.

While occasional errors may still occur due to the inherent complexities and uncertainties involved in natural language processing and AI, the overall trend should be toward increased accuracy and consistency as the conversation progresses.

Me: Sounds good. You mentioned learning from mistakes; do you have any specific ideas about how to learn from the mistakes you've made calculating the 23rd digit of pi in this conversation that you could apply?

ChatGPT3.5: One approach to learning from mistakes in calculating the 23rd digit of pi in this conversation involves implementing corrective measures and adjustments to improve future responses. Here are some specific ideas:

Error Analysis: Conduct a thorough analysis of the errors made in previous responses, including identifying the sources of inaccuracies and understanding the factors contributing to them. This analysis can help pinpoint areas for improvement and guide the development of targeted strategies.

Review Training Data: Revisit and review the training data used to train the model, paying attention to examples related to the calculation of pi and its digits. Ensure that the training data is comprehensive, diverse, and representative of the types of questions and contexts encountered in real-world interactions.

Fine-Tuning: Implement fine-tuning techniques to adjust the model's parameters and update its weights based on the errors identified during the conversation. Fine-tuning allows the model to adapt and improve its performance in specific areas, such as mathematical calculations or numerical sequences.

Error Handling Mechanisms: Develop error handling mechanisms within the model to detect and address inaccuracies in real-time. These mechanisms can include confidence estimation algorithms, error correction modules, and validation checks against known references or benchmarks.

Continual Learning: Incorporate continual learning techniques to enable the model to dynamically update its knowledge and understanding based on new information and experiences gained during interactions. This ensures that the model remains adaptive and responsive to evolving patterns and trends.

By implementing these strategies and leveraging the feedback provided during the conversation, the model can iteratively learn from its mistakes and improve its accuracy and reliability in calculating the digits of pi and similar mathematical tasks.

Me: Do any of those bullet points include techniques you use?

ChatGPT3.5: As an AI language model, I don't have direct access to my own training data or the ability to modify my parameters or training methods. However, the principles underlying the bullet points I mentioned align with the broader concepts used in machine learning and natural language processing, some of which are reflected in my design and development:

Error Analysis: While I don't conduct explicit error analysis myself, developers and researchers can analyze errors made by models like mine to identify areas for improvement and guide future development efforts.

Review Training Data: The quality and diversity of the training data used to train models like mine are crucial factors in determining performance. Continual efforts are made by developers to curate and update training datasets to ensure they reflect real-world scenarios as accurately as possible.

Fine-Tuning: Fine-tuning techniques are commonly used in training machine learning models, including language models like mine, to adjust model parameters and improve performance on specific tasks or domains.

Error Handling Mechanisms: Error handling mechanisms may be implemented within the design of models like mine to detect and address inaccuracies, although the specific implementation details are managed by developers.

Continual Learning: While models like mine are not inherently capable of continual learning in the same way as biological systems, developers may implement techniques to periodically update models with new data or knowledge to improve performance over time.

While I don't directly execute these techniques myself, they represent common practices in the development and refinement of machine learning models, which contribute to the ongoing improvement of models like mine.

Me: Hm, thanks. Based on my understanding, then, I'm not confident in your ability to increase your success rate up to 90% (from, so far, not having gotten the question correct) within a single conversation where these kinds of techniques aren't being used on an ongoing basis. Let's see what happens: what's the 23rd digit of pi?

ChatGPT3.5: The 23rd digit of pi, including the "3" before the decimal point, is 4.

1 note · View note