Abstract:
A way to conduct multiple distinct searches and to present the respective result subsets  176  together but distinctly. More particularly a way to order the results subsets  176  in relation to each other and to present the result subsets  176  in that order together but distinctly, such that a user can easily scan between the result subsets  176  to adjust the focus of his research.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
       [0001]    1. Field of the Invention 
         [0002]    The present invention relates to ways to interact with a search engine. More particularly, it relates to ways to order results from multiple search engines for presentation together but distinctly. 
         [0003]    2. Description of the Related Art 
         [0004]    The Holy Grail of search engines would conduct an exhaustively comprehensive search and present the results in a way that groups and highlights those most relevant to the searcher&#39;s particular needs at that instant. Just as with the Holy Grail, such a valuable search engine has proved elusive and some would say mythical. 
         [0005]    One relatively old approach has been to create meta-search engines, in which a single set of search terms is broadcast to multiple search engines and then results from all the search engines are aggregated, either into a single result list or into a result list segregated by search engine. This approach arguably increases comprehensiveness, but not relevancy. The results can include multiple instances of the same item and there is generally no clear distinction between all of the search engines. 
         [0006]    For this reason, some have urged against presenting multiple subsets of results. For example U.S. Pat. No. 7,206,778 granted to Andreas Bode et. al. on Apr. 17, 2007 for a “ Text Search Ordered Along One or More Dimensions ” teaches a method of conducting multiple searches and then combining the results into a single homogenous result set in which duplicate results are removed and the remaining results are assigned a rank in a common ranking scheme within the homogenous result set. This consolidation saves the user time that might otherwise be spent combing through overlapping subsets and ranking results between subsets. 
         [0007]    While the Bode approach has its merits, it has its shortcomings as well. The process of homogenization destroys useful information—the link between a particular search result and the search that produced it. One value of this link is illustrated in U.S. Ser. No. 11/092,387 (US20060106788) filed by Brady D. Forrest on Mar. 29, 2005 (and claiming priority back to Oct. 29, 2004) for a “ Computer - Implemented System and Method for Providing Authoritative Answers to a General Information Search ”. Forest teaches the practice of searching both a general and an expert dataset and presenting the respective results at different locations on the same display to help a user weigh the quality of each result by associating it with its respective dataset. For example, a big, general and unedited dataset, such as the World Wide Web, is searched to provide broad results of unknown credibility, but a smaller dataset of expert answers assembled and vetted by editors is also searched to provide more credible results when available. The data in the expert dataset is created and vetted expressly for the purposes of growing a dataset of expert answers and is specially structured as a question, an answer and a credibility score in combination. In contrast, the Web dataset grows more organically and is more freeform. Forrest does not provide any teaching on overlaying a credibility measure on a large, organic dataset like the Web. 
         [0008]    Thus, the Forrest invention is not suitable for general application but is limited by the prerequisites for its datasets; the two datasets are distinct and one of the datasets must include a measure of credibility. U.S. Ser. No. 10/021,474 (US20030084032) filed by Sukhminder Grewal and Mir Faiz Mohammad on Oct. 30, 2001 for “ Methods and Systems for Performing a Controlled Search ” teaches the practice of conducting multiple queries on the same large, organic dataset—for example the Web—with the queries having broader to narrower scope and presenting such result sets one at a time, but allowing a user to switch between result sets in order, so as to in effect zoom in or out on the search results. 
         [0009]    While each of these inventions has its purpose, what is needed is a way to conduct multiple distinct searches on a universe of information and to present the respective result subsets together but distinctly in a manner that helps each user to skim to the subset that most interests him in particular. More specifically, what is needed is a way to order the results subsets with respect to each other and to present the result subsets in that order together but distinctly, such that a user can easily scan between the results subsets to adjust the focus of his research. 
       SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION AND ADVANTAGES 
       [0010]    The present invention is directed to such a solution. 
         [0011]    According to one aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method of presenting a result set of a plurality of searches of a universe of content, the plurality of searches returning respective result subsets of indicants that in union form the result set, comprising serving a page that presents the subsets, ordered with respect to each other according to scope, together but distinctly such that each subset presents a distinct cue to its respective scope. 
         [0012]    According to a second aspect of the present invention, there is provided an apparatus for presenting a result set of a plurality of searches of a universe of content, the plurality of searches returning respective result subsets of indicants that in union form the result set, comprising means for serving a page that presents the subsets, ordered with respect to each other according to scope, together but distinctly such that each subset presents a distinct cue to its respective scope. 
         [0013]    According to a third aspect of the present invention, there is provided a computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions for performing a method of presenting a result set of a plurality of searches of a universe of content, the plurality of searches returning respective result subsets of indicants that in union form the result set, comprising serving a page that presents the subsets, ordered with respect to each other according to scope, together but distinctly such that each subset presents a distinct cue to its respective scope. 
         [0014]    According to a fourth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a carrier wave communicating a computer-readable signal encoding computer-executable instructions for performing a method of presenting a result set of a plurality of searches of a universe of content, the plurality of searches returning respective result subsets of indicants that in union form the result set, comprising serving a page that presents the subsets, ordered with respect to each other according to scope, together but distinctly such that each subset presents a distinct cue to its respective scope. 
         [0015]    The universe might be the union of respective sub-universes searched by each respective one of the plurality of searches. Two of the respective sub-universes might have a non-null intersection set, or even each of the respective sub-universes may have a non-null intersection set with at least one other of the respective sub-universes, or in fact each pair of respective sub-universes might have a non-null intersection set. Each pair of respective sub-universes might even have an intersection set that is identical to one of the pair. 
         [0016]    The plurality of searches might operate on the same search terms or on the same query. 
         [0017]    Presenting the ordered subsets together but distinctly might include: presenting the ordered subsets adjacently on the page such that the cue is position, presenting the ordered subsets in respective windows on the same page, presenting each of the ordered subsets adjacent to a respective distinguishing indicia, presenting each of the ordered subsets in a respective distinguishing color, or presenting each of the ordered subsets in a respective distinguishing font. 
         [0018]    These aspects of the invention might also provide for ordering the subsets ( 176 ) with respect to each other according to scope. 
         [0019]    Ordering the subsets might include ordering the subsets in the order of the respective searches. 
         [0020]    Ordering the subsets might include ordering the subsets from: broad to narrow, deep to shallow, analyzed to synthesized, deduced to induced, investigative to explorative, tightly-related to the keywords searched to loosely-related to the keywords searched, literal to lateral, denotative to connotative, general to personal, concrete to abstract, machine-selected to human-selected, factual to speculative, historical to future-oriented, global to local, simple to complicated, short to long, objective to subjective, search to recommendation, fact to opinion, deterministic to probabilistic, descriptive to prescriptive, static to dynamic, popular to specialist, biased to neutral, emotional to rational, dormant to active, controlled to open, unilingual to multilingual, corporate to personal, corporate to academic, leftwing to rightwing, innocent to mature, fictional to factual, personalized on the same basis as everyone to personalized by comparison to others, implicitly preferenced to explicitly preferenced, or keyword-based to natural-language-based. 
         [0021]    Ordering the subsets might include ordering the subsets according to more than one dimension of scope. 
         [0022]    According to a fifth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method of presenting a result set of a plurality of keyword searches of content, the plurality of searches returning respective result subsets of indicants that in union form the result set, comprising serving a page that presents the subsets, ordered with respect to each other according to scope from tightly-related to the keywords searched to loosely-related to the keywords searched, together but distinctly such that each subset presents a distinct cue to its respective scope. 
         [0023]    Serving might include serving a page that presents user-selectable labels representing categories of indicants in the result set, in at least one of the subsets, or in the one of the subsets that is most loosely-related to the keywords searched. 
     
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         [0024]    Other advantages of the present invention will be readily appreciated, as the same becomes better understood by reference to the following detailed description when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings wherein: 
           [0025]      FIG. 1  is a topological diagram showing one embodiment a network of communication and computing devices connected together to implement a method and system for interacting with a search engine according to one aspect of the present invention. 
           [0026]      FIG. 2  is an abstraction layer diagram of the communication and computing devices of  FIG. 1 , illustrating a hardware layer, operating system layers and an application program layer. 
           [0027]      FIG. 3  is an abstraction layer diagram detailing the application program layer of  FIG. 2  for configuring a communication and computing device as a web browser, a web server or a search engine. 
           [0028]      FIG. 4  is a database structure diagram illustrating how a communication and computing device configured as a search engine maintains an indicant for each item of internet content catalogued. 
           [0029]      FIG. 5  depicts a GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for submitting a search query, controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from three search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other. 
           [0030]      FIG. 6  depicts four interrelated GUI windows created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, a first window including controls for submitting a search query, and second, third and fourth windows including controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from three search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other. 
           [0031]      FIG. 7  depicts a single GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from three search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other and the order is cued by a respective distinctive font associated with each subset. 
           [0032]      FIG. 8  depicts a single GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from three search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other and the order is cued by a respective distinctive color associated with each subset. 
           [0033]      FIG. 9  depicts a single GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from four search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other from narrow to broad and the order is cued by a respective distinctive icons associated with each subset. 
           [0034]      FIG. 10  depicts a single GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from three search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other from historical to future-oriented and the order is cued by a respective distinctive icons associated with each subset. 
           [0035]      FIG. 11  depicts a single GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from three search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other from global to local and the order is cued by a respective distinctive icons associated with each subset. 
           [0036]      FIG. 12  depicts a single GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from two search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other from general to personalized and the order is cued by a respective distinctive icons associated with each subset, and controls for presenting labels that categorize the indicants. 
           [0037]      FIG. 13  depicts a GUI window created by a communication and computing device configured as a web server for presentation at a communication and computing device configured as a web browser, the window including controls for submitting a search query, controls for presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from nine search engines processing the same query wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other along two axes, namely a broad to narrow axis and a past to future axis. 
           [0038]      FIG. 14  is a flowchart of a process executing in a communication and computing device configured as a web server for submitting a search query to a plurality of search engines and presenting together but distinctly respective subsets of indicants resulting from the search engines processing the same query, wherein the subsets are ordered with respect to each other. 
           [0039]      FIG. 15  is a flowchart of an augmented version of the process of  FIG. 14 , further including presenting labels that categorize the indicants and refining the search query to bias toward one of the labels. 
           [0040]      FIG. 16  is a flowchart of another augmented version of the process of  FIG. 14 , further including sequencing the transmission of queries to the search engines and forwarding to later-queried search engines data related to searches performed by earlier-queried search engines, for example complete result subsets or categories. 
       
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
       [0041]    1. Structure 
         [0042]      FIG. 1  depicts a system  100  of communication and computing devices  102  connected together through an internetwork  104  to provide one embodiment of a system  100  for interacting with a plurality of search engines  106  according to one aspect of the present invention. In this regard, each communication and computing device  102  might be configured as a search engine  106 , a web server  108  or a web browser  110 . 
         [0043]    A web browser  110  might be a duly configured general purpose programmable computer  112  or a more purpose-specific device  114 , such as a smartphone, a pocket browser, or portable media viewer with a wireless modem. 
         [0044]    A web server  108  or a search engine  106  might similarly be a duly configured general purpose programmable computer  112 , as illustrated, but might also be a farm of such computers or one or more virtualized computers embodied as processes operating on a physical general purpose programmable computer  112 . Such farmed or virtualized computers might themselves be distributed over their own local or wide area network, not shown. 
         [0045]    In essence, the search engine  106 , the web server  108  and the web browsers  110  are roles or functions performed in the system  100  by properly configured devices  102 . Multiple roles or functions could be performed by one device  102  and one role or function could be distributed over multiple devices  102 . The specific character of a device  102  (and more generally the hardware) and the network topology is not important so long as it supports the performance of the assigned roles or functions. 
         [0046]      FIG. 2  illustrates a common construction of the search engine  106 , the web server  108  and the web browser  110 . These devices  102  have a hardware layer  116 , an operating system layer  118  and an application program layer  120 . Those skilled in the art will recognize the aspects in which like virtualized hardware and devices  102  depart from like physical ones. 
         [0047]    The hardware layer  116  provides the device  102  with computing and communication hardware, including: (a) a processor  122  to execute processes of instructions and compute data, (b) user-input hardware such as a keyboard  124  and a selection device  126  (for example a mouse  126 ) to receive input from a user, (c) user-output hardware such as a video display  128  to provide information to a user, (d) mass storage  130  such as electromagnetic, optical or nonvolatile solid-state media to store data and processing instructions, (e) memory such as read only memory  132  and random access memory  134  to store data and processing instructions, and (f) a network interface  136  to support communication with other devices  102  in accordance with known protocols such as TCP/IP, all interconnected by buses such as address and data buses and control lines such as interrupt and clock lines and such other connections and components as is conventionally required and known to in the art. 
         [0048]    Stored in a portion of the read only memory  132  and the mass storage  130  are the components of the operating system layer  118 , for example LINUX® or Microsoft® Windows® CE® or VISTA®. The operating system layer  118  provides the basic instructions to direct the processor  122  how to interact with the other hardware described above and more generally how to perform the functions of a general purpose programmable computer  112 , including storing, accessing and computing data, and communicating with other devices  102 . 
         [0049]    The operating system layer  118  also presents an application program interface  142  to the application program layer  120 , so the processor  122  can execute more sophisticated combinations of processes under the direction of higher level application programs  144  stored in mass storage  130  and loaded into RAM  134  for execution. 
         [0050]      FIG. 3  illustrates three such application programs  144 , namely a web browser application program  146  such as Microsoft® Internet Explorer®, Firefox®, Safari® or Opera® to configure a device  102  as a web browser  110 , a web server application program  148  such as Apache® Apache®, Microsoft® Internet Information Services® or Google® Google Web Server® to configure a device  102  as a web server  108 , and a search engine application program  150  such as Google®, Yahoo!®, Microsoft® Live Search® or Ask.com® to configure a device  102  as a search engine  106 . 
         [0051]    As best seen with reference to  FIG. 4 , a device  102  configured by the search engine application program  150  to be a search engine  106  maintains a search engine database  152  that catalogs the content items  154  it finds on the Internet  104 . Each content item  154  may be understood as a payload  156  locatable at a unique address  138  on the Internet  104 . The payload  156  is code encoding information in any medium or form, including human-readable form such as text, graphic, audio or video and machine-readable form such as source or object code or data files. 
         [0052]    For each content item  154 , the search engine database  152  maintains an indicant  158 , comprising a pointer  160  to the Internet  104  address  138  where the respective content item  154  resides, a representation  162  of the payload  156 , and metadata  164  about the content item  154 . The representation  162  might be a complete cache of the payload  156  or else it might be a précis suitable for displaying in search result sets  166 , for example a thumbnail, a clip, an icon  178 , a summary or a portion of the payload  156 . The metadata  164  would include data the search engine  106  program uses to contextualize the content item  154 , for example ranking data. 
         [0053]    The search engine database  152  also maps keywords  168  to indicants  158 , such that a search for a particular keyword  168  will locate the applicable indicants  158 , ranked in accordance with the metadata  164 . This mapping might be done through indexing keyword records  170 , as illustrated, or otherwise. 
         [0054]      FIG. 5  shows a first embodiment page  172  of search results served by the web server  108  to the web browser  110  incorporating a set of search results  166  from multiple search engines  106 . In this regard, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the multiple search engines  106  might be multiple instances of the same search engine  106  or one instance of the same search engine  106  queried multiple times, for example with different search parameters set so as to return different search results. 
         [0055]    The set of search results  166  is the union of the search result subsets  176  returned by the respective search engines  106 . The search result subsets  176  are presented together but distinctly on the first embodiment page  172  of search results, with a respective cue  178  indicating the correspondence between each of the search result subsets  176  and its respective search engine  106 . As illustrated, each of the search result subsets  176  is presented in its own scrollable list and all the scrollable lists are presented adjacently. As illustrated, the cue  178  for each subset  176  is a legend (Engine A, Engine B, Engine C) and the position of the list (left, middle, right). 
         [0056]    Although three subsets  176  are shown ordered, lesser or greater numbers of subsets  176  could be ordered with similarly beneficial effect. The user is able to focus the scope of his search simply by scanning his eyes from one subset  176  to another, quickly focusing in on the subset  176  of results with the scope that best matches his intentions. Because the subsets  176  are presented together but distinctly on one page, the user can make this assessment quickly and simply by scanning his eyes, without having to switch between windows  140  or drill-down through hyperlinks classifications or related pages, for example. With experience, the user can become even more efficient, predicting the best subset  176  to start his scanning for particular types of queries  182 . Thus the cue  178  linking subset  176  to search engine  106  is in fact also a cue  178  indicating the scope of the subset  176 . 
         [0057]    Considering the first embodiment page  172  now in greater detail, the subsets  176  have been ordered with respect to each other in accordance with a particular metric, such that the subset  176  most characterized by the metric is presented in the left list, the moderately characterized subset  176  is presented in the middle list, and the least characterized subset  176  is presented in the right list. Those skilled in the art will recognize that this linear ordering is only one of many positional orders that might be used. 
         [0058]    The result subsets  176  might be ordered according to many useful metrics of scope, for example from narrow to broad, from more deep to more shallow, from more analytic to more synthetic, from more deductive to more inductive, from more investigative to more explorative, from more tightly-related to the keywords  168  searched to more loosely-related to the keywords  168  searched, from more literal to more lateral, from more denotative to more connotative, more general to more personal, from more concrete to more abstract, from machine-selected in larger proportion to human-selected in larger proportion, from more factual to more speculative, from more historical to more future-oriented, more from global to more local, from more simple to more complicated, from shorter to longer, from more objective to more subjective, from more related to keywords  168  searched to more related to a user&#39;s broader interests, from more factual to more opinionated, from deterministic in larger proportion to probabilistic in larger proportion, from more descriptive to more prescriptive, from more structured to more random, from more popular to more specialist, from more biased to more neutral, from more emotional to more rational, from more dormant to more active, from more controlled to more open, from unilingual in larger proportion to multilingual in larger proportion, from more corporate to more personal, from more corporate to more academic, from more closely identified with a first ideology to more closely identified with a second ideology, from more innocent to more mature, from more fictional to more factual, from more personalized on the same basis as everyone to more personalized by comparison to others, from implicitly preferenced through behavior in larger proportion to explicitly preferenced through statement in larger proportion, from interpreting the query  182  more lexically to more interpreting the query  182  more semantically. 
         [0059]    Thus if one is searching for introductory general knowledge on a topic, for example, he might prefer: broad, shallow, explorative, general, simple, or short search results. In contrast, if one is delving into a topic he is already somewhat familiar with, he may prefer: narrow, deep, investigative, personal, complicated, or long search results. If one is brainstorming, he may prefer: synthetic, inductive, lateral, connotative, abstract, speculative, probabilistic, prescriptive or dynamic search results. If one is searching vaguely for thinks that might interest someone such as himself, he might prefer: personal search results, which depending on the circumstances, might best be local, machine-selected, human-selected, personalized on the same basis as everyone, personalized by comparison to others, implicitly preferenced, explicitly preferenced search results or more generally a recommendation. If one is forecasting, he might prefer: future-oriented, probabilistic, prescriptive, dynamic results. 
         [0060]    Those skilled in the art will recognize that scope is different from, and therefore does not include, metrics of quality, such as: good results versus bad results, right results versus wrong results, relevant results versus irrelevant results, authoritative results versus unauthoritative results or credible results versus incredible results, which are not beneficial axes for ordering result sets  166 . 
         [0061]    For example, historically-oriented search results and future-oriented search results might be equally “relevant” to their respective searchers and equally “irrelevant” to others and so such metrics of quality are imprecise and not generally useful. Alternatively, where a quality metric is of broad application, such as “wrong”, then results so designated would better be simply filtered out than ordered. 
         [0062]    It will be appreciated that some results ordered by scope may also become ordered to a greater or lesser degree by some metric of quality; this side effect should not be seen to limit the ambit of the present invention, as such hybrid scenarios still deliver the benefits of the invention in the manner taught herein. 
         [0063]    Those skilled in the art will also recognize that scope, which is inherently orderable, is different from classification, which in general is not orderable. For example, it is known for search engines  106  to classify result subsets  176  by data type (TIF files, MPS files, MPEG files, PDF files, HTML files), by kind of content  154  (news, maps, advertisements), by source (newspapers, particular search engines  106 , blogs, special interest groups), by Internet  104  domain (.com, .net, .org), and by semantic concept. 
         [0064]    Classifying is a unary operation. One examines an item in isolation to determine whether it has the requisite characteristics to be a member of a classification. One doesn&#39;t need to know anything about any other classification or any other item to determine whether or not an item is a member of a classification. In contrast, scoping and ordering are binary or n-ary operations—relational operations—that cannot be applied to a single item in isolation but only applied through comparison of two or more items along a predetermined dimension. 
         [0065]    Classification delivers benefits to users; however, these are different from the benefits delivered by ordering. Classification helps users to quickly identify items that have the inherent characteristics required to be a member of a particular classification, thus helping users to filter out all the other items in a universe that are not of immediate interest. In contrast, ordering in effect overlays a relationship between subsets that cannot be inferred from any one item itself, thus helping users to scan between subsets  176  to focus their search. 
         [0066]    More concretely, if a first classification of subset  176  proves fruitless, a user must assess the remaining classifications of subsets  176  and consider the next one to investigate. In contrast, if a first ordered subset  176  proves fruitless, a user merely considers how much he wants to increase or decrease his scope and delves into the corresponding ordered subset  176  without need for further consideration. 
         [0067]    On occasion, weak ordering might be inferred as a secondary effect of classification. For example, when content  154  is classified into HTML format and PDF format, users may recognize that authors tend to use PDF format for longer works and as a result such experienced users may select or reject one classification or the other depending on the depth of their search. However, less experienced users may be unable to make this inference and regardless, being a mere weak inference by the user, it will be less certain and less helpful than an explicit ordering promised by a content  154  provider. 
         [0068]    Furthermore, when other common data types are included in the classification scheme, for example TIF, MP3, MPEG formats (which don&#39;t share the same weak relationship), it will be appreciated that this classification actually helps users more to filter than to scope. For example, the MP3 classification might include audio files with more in-depth information than either the HTML files or the PDF files; however, there is no inference that would suggest this outcome and with mere classification instead of ordering there is no other aid to guide the user. 
         [0069]    In implementation, ordering might be anticipatory or actual. In other words, the subsets  176  might be ordered based upon characteristics of their respective corresponding search engines  106  before the actual search results have come into existence, or else the subsets  176  might be ordered based upon their own actual characteristics once they have been populated. 
         [0070]    Experts in searching various domains develop the ability to predict in advance what search engine  106  and query  182  is most likely to return results of a particular focus, scope or character. Thus experience or logic might anticipate that three search engines  106  will return respectively broad, moderate and narrow search results when searching the same keywords  168 . For example, the broad search engine  106  might be configured to return a results subset  176  of content  154  having payload  156  that includes any of the keywords  168 ; the moderate search engine  106  might be configured to return a results subset  176  of content  154  having payload  156  that includes all of the keywords  168 ; the narrow search engine  106  might be configured to return a results subset  176  of content  154  having payload  156  that includes only the keywords  168  arranged in a specific phrase. To similar effect, three queries  182  of varying scope might be provided to the same search engine  106 . 
         [0071]    Alternatively, the ordering might be performed on the actual subsets  176  once they have been populated. Thus for example, where subsets  176  are being ordered from local to global, one could analyze the indicant  158  pointers  160  as a measure of where the corresponding content item  154  was being served from or the indicant  158  representations  162  for geographic words and then order each of the subsets  176  based on the proportion of global to local content  154  of its members indicants  158 . 
         [0072]      FIG. 5  also illustrates some other convenient features. To help with preprocessing, the first embodiment page  172  also provides a query box  184  for entering a uniform set of keywords  168  for all searches and a search button  186  to engage the multiple search engines  106  in searching the keywords  168  entered in the query box  184 . 
         [0073]      FIG. 6  shows a second embodiment page  188  of search results served by the web server  108  to the web browser  110  incorporating a set of search results  166  from multiple search engines  106 . 
         [0074]    As before, the set of search results  166  is the union of the search result subsets  176  returned by the respective search engines  106 . The search results subsets  176  are presented together but distinctly on the second embodiment page  188  of search results, with a respective cue  178  indicating the correspondence between each of the search result subsets  176  and its respective search engine  106 . As illustrated, each of the search result subsets  176  is presented in its own window  140  and all the windows  140  are presented adjacently. As illustrated, the cue  178  for each subset  176  is a window  140  title (Broad, Narrow, Medium) and the position of the window  140  (left, middle, right). 
         [0075]      FIG. 7  shows a third embodiment page  190  of search results served by the web server  108  to the web browser  110  incorporating a set of search results  166  from multiple search engines  106 . 
         [0076]    As before, the set of search results  166  is the union of the search result subsets  176  returned by the respective search engines  106 . The search results subsets  176  are presented together but distinctly on the third embodiment page  190  of search results, with a respective cue  178  indicating the correspondence between each of the search result subsets  176  and its respective search engine  106 . As illustrated, each of the search result subsets  176  is presented intermingled in the same scrollable list in the same window  140 . As illustrated, the cue  178  for each subset  176  is type, with Search A being depicted in bold 24-point type, Search B being depicted in italic point type, and Search C being depicted in plain 12-point type. Those skilled in the art will recognize that fonts could also act as cues  178 , with some thought given to how to represent order, for example a progression from ornately serifed to sans serif. 
         [0077]      FIG. 8  shows a fourth embodiment page  191  of search results served by the web server  108  to the web browser  110  incorporating a set of search results  166  from multiple search engines  106 . 
         [0078]    As before, the set of search results  166  is the union of the search result subsets  176  returned by the respective search engines  106 . The search results subsets  176  are presented together but distinctly on the fourth embodiment page  191  of search results, with a respective cue  178  indicating the correspondence between each of the search result subsets  176  and its respective search engine  106 . As illustrated, each of the search result subsets  176  is presented intermingled in the same scrollable list in the same window  140 . As illustrated, the cue  178  for each subset  176  is color, with Search A being depicted in red, Search B being depicted in italic yellow, and Search C being depicted in green. Those skilled in the art will recognize that some thought can be given to how to represent order to make the order easier for a user to recognize and remember, for example, the traffic light order depicted in  FIG. 8 , the order of the spectrum, lightest to darkest or otherwise. However, none of the cues  178  as taught need to follow a conventionally accepted order. 
         [0079]    Similarly,  FIGS. 9 to 12  show respectively a fifth embodiment page  192  of search results, a sixth embodiment page  194  of search results, a seventh embodiment page  196  of search results and an eighth embodiment page  198  of search results, each served by the web server  108  to the web browser  110  incorporating a set of search results  166  from multiple search engines  106 . 
         [0080]    As before, the set of search results  166  is the union of the search result subsets  176  returned by the respective search engines  106 . The search results subsets  176  are presented together but distinctly on these pages of search results, with a respective cue  178  indicating the correspondence between each of the search result subsets  176  and its respective search engine  106 . As illustrated, each of the search result subsets  176  is presented intermingled in the same scrollable list in the same window  140 . As illustrated, the cue  178  for each subset  176  is a distinguishing indicia  178  such as an icon  178 . In  FIG. 9  where the order is investigative to exploratory, the icons  178  progress from a microscope to a magnifying glass to a telescope to a brain primed for lateral thinking. In  FIG. 10  where the order is historical to future-focused, the icons  178  progress from a Greek temple to a current “present” to a crystal ball. In  FIG. 11  where the order is global to local, the icons  178  progress from a globe to the national flag of the United States of America to a house. In  FIG. 12  where the order is results tightly-related to the keywords  168  searched to results loosely-related to the keywords  168  searched, the icons  178  progress from a gear train to a relaxed spring. 
         [0081]      FIG. 12  may be seen as ordering a search engine  106  result subset  176  (tightly-related to the keywords  168  searched) and recommendation engine result subset  176  (loosely-related to the keywords  168  searched). In this regard, this ordering is similar to ordering from analytic to synthetic, from deductive to inductive, from investigative to explorative, from literal to lateral, or from denotative to connotative. In other words, the personalized results are likely to include things of significant interest to the user that were not the generic focus of the literal search and that would not likely be relevant or of interest to a generic user. 
         [0082]    In implementation, the personalized results might be either machine-selected, human-selected or a hybrid. They might be personalized on the same basis as everyone else or else personalized by comparing the user to others of similar or dissimilar interests. The user&#39;s preferences might be discovered either explicitly—for example through questionnaire, member profile, or query  182  history—or implicitly through behavior—for example click-through or page-view behavior. 
         [0083]      FIG. 12  also illustrates some other convenient features. To help with post-processing, the eighth embodiment page  198  also provides a scrollable list of user-selectable labels  200  representing categories  180  of indicants  158  in the result set  166  as a whole or in one or more of the subsets  176 , for example just the subset  176  of results from the recommender engine. The labels  200  can be formatted to indicate the relative numbers of members in each category  180 , such that crowded categories  180  are represented by labels  200  that are bold, italic, large, brightly colored or the like. As will be described in greater detail below, by selecting one of the labels  200 , the user can re-execute the searches with a bias toward the category  180  represented by the label  200  selected. 
         [0084]      FIG. 13  shows a ninth embodiment page  202  of search results served by the web server  108  to the web browser  110  incorporating a set of search results  166  from multiple search engines  106 . 
         [0085]    As before, the set of search results  166  is the union of the search result subsets  176  returned by the respective search engines  106 . The search results subsets  176  are presented together but distinctly on the ninth embodiment page  202  of search results, with a respective cue  178  indicating the correspondence between each of the search result subsets  176  and its respective search engine  106 . As illustrated, each of the search result subsets  176  is presented in its own window  140  and all the windows  140  are presented as a two-dimensional matrix. As illustrated, the cue  178  for each subset  176  is a window  140  title (Broad &amp; Past, Medium &amp; Past, Narrow &amp; Past, Broad &amp; Current, Medium &amp; Current, Narrow &amp; Current, Broad &amp; Future, Medium &amp; Future, Narrow &amp; Future) and the position of the window  140  (top left, top middle, top right, middle left, middle middle, middle right, bottom left, bottom middle, bottom right). 
         [0086]    Thus the ninth embodiment page  202  is an example of ordering results along more than one dimension. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that subsets  176  can be usefully ordered along more than one dimension without fully populating all positions in the order; for example, in the example illustrated on might choose not to include a “Broad &amp; Past” subset  176 . 
         [0087]    2. Operation 
         [0088]    The embodiments presented attempt to illustrate broadly some of the many ways of serving a page that presents the subsets  176 , ordered with respect to each other according to scope, together but distinctly such that each subset  176  presents a distinct cue  178  to its respective scope. Those skilled in the art will recognize there are many ways to implement this page service. The subsets  176  might be contained in a singled HTML document retrieved by a single HTTP request. The subsets  176  might be contained in the same HTML document, retrieved by multiple concurrent or non-concurrent HTTP requests (i.e. AJAX). Each subset  176  might be contained in a respective HTML document, but displayed on the same page using Frames or IFrames. Each subset  176  might be contained in a respective HTML document, but displayed together in multiple adjacent browser windows  140 . 
         [0089]      FIG. 14  illustrates a presentation process  204  executable by the processor  122  of the web server  108  to provide the functionality described above in accordance with stored instructions. These instructions may be encoded in the RAM  134 , ROM  132 , mass storage  130  or a signal received via the network interface  136  of the web server  108 . 
         [0090]    Those skilled in the art will understand that in an internetworked system  100  an action is often the result of coordinated activities occurring at multiple nodes in the system  100 . In the case of a system  100  built on the Internet  104 , these nodes are often distributed ad hoc and unpredictably across multiple jurisdictions. The actions as described and claimed herein are intended to encompass at least: (a) actions performed directly and completely within the jurisdiction of the patent, (b) actions coordinated within the jurisdiction but with at least some activities performed outside the jurisdiction, (c) actions coordinated outside the jurisdiction but with at least some activities performed within the jurisdiction, and (d) actions performed for the benefit of a node within the jurisdiction or a person using that node. An example of such coordination would be serving a layout for a web page from one node and serving content  154  for insertion into the layout from one or more other nodes, including through the use of server-side scripting, client-side scripting, and AJAX techniques. 
         [0091]    The presentation process  204  begins with a query step  206 , in which the web server  108  receives search terms  168  from a user, formulates those search terms  168  into appropriate queries  182  for the search engines  106  to be searched, and sends the respective queries  182  to the respective search engines  106  that, each according to its own methodology, search a universe of content items  154 . 
         [0092]    The invention is widely applicable and not restricted to use with only specialized datasets. In this regard, all the search engines  106  might search the whole universe or else at least some of the search engines  106  might search sub-universes. In the case where each search engine  106  searches a sub-universe, then the universe would be the union of these sub-universes. The sub-universes might be related, such that for example: (a) two of the sub-universes have a non-null intersection set, or (b) each of the sub-universes has a non-null intersection set with at least one other of the sub-universes, or (c) each pair of sub-universes has a non-null intersection set, or (d) each pair of sub-universes has an intersection set that is identical to one of the pair. More concretely, the invention is applicable to open resources on the public Internet  104 , to proprietary resources in accessible private and semi-private domains connected to an internetwork  104  such as the Internet  104 , and to various combinations thereof. 
         [0093]    In a collection step  210 , the web server  108  receives respective result subsets  176  back from the search engines  106  and in an ordering step  212  the web server  108  orders each of the subsets  176  with respect to the other subsets  176  along one or more predetermined axes, as described above, for example narrow to broad. 
         [0094]    In a results presentation step  214 , the web server  108  assembles a page for presentation on a video display  128  at the user&#39;s web browser  110  under the control of a web browser  110  program that presents the ordered subsets  176  together but distinctly on the video display  128 , such that a cue  178  indicates which subset  176  is associated with which search engine  106  or more generally which query  182 . More specifically, what is presented are the indicant  158  representations  162  of the content items  154  identified by the search engines  106 . 
         [0095]    The presentation process  204  further provides for an indicant-selection step  216 , in which the web server  108  receives a signal from the web browser  110  indicating that the user selected one particular indicant  158  in one of the subsets  176  presented—conventionally by using a selection device  126  such as a mouse  126  in combination with the video display  128 . 
         [0096]    In a content presentation step  218 , the web server  108  serves to the web browser  110  the payload  156  at the pointer  160  associated with the selected indicant  158 . Those skilled in the art will recognize that as an alternative implementation, at the results presentation step  214  the web server  108  might have served pointers  160  together with respective indicants  158  so that payloads  156  could be access directly by the web browser  110 . 
         [0097]      FIG. 15  illustrates an elaboration of the presentation process  204  shown in  FIG. 14 . In general, it provides the user with the ability to search iteratively, using the result set  166  of a current iteration to focus the queries  182  of a next iteration. 
         [0098]    In this elaboration, after the results presentation step  214 , there is a category presentation step  220 , in which the web server  108  identifies categories  180  of indicants  158  in the result set  166  and presents a group of labels  200  representing the categories  180  along with the result set  166 . 
         [0099]    In a user-signal detection step  222 , the web server  108  detects signals from the user of the web browser  110  and distinguishes between an indicant-selection signal as described above with respect to the indicant-selection step  216  and a category-selection signal. If the former is detected, then the indicant-selection step  216  and following steps are performed as described above. Alternatively, if a category-selection signal is detected, then a category-selection step  224  is performed. 
         [0100]    In the category-selection step  224 , the web server  108  receives a signal from the web browser  110  indicating that the user selected one particular category  180  label  200 —conventionally by using a selection device  126  such as a mouse  126  in combination with the video display  128 . 
         [0101]    In a revised query step  226 , the web server  108  receives reformulates the search terms  168  into appropriate queries  182  for the search engines  106  to be searched, biasing the queries  182  toward the category  180  associated with the selected label  200 , and sends the respective reformulated queries  182  to the respective search engines  106 . 
         [0102]    In a revised collection step  228 , the web server  108  receives respective revised result subsets  176  back from the search engines  106  and in a revised ordering step  230  the web server  108  orders each of the revised subsets  176  with respect to the other revised subsets  176  along the predetermined axis. 
         [0103]    In a revised results presentation step  232 , the web server  108  assembles a page for presentation on the video display  128  at the user&#39;s web browser  110  under the control of the web browser  110  program that presents the ordered revised subsets  176  together but distinctly on the video display  128 , such that a cue  178  indicates which subset  176  is associated with which search engine  106  or more generally which query  182 . More specifically, what is presented are the indicant  158  representations  162  of the content items  154  identified by the search engines  106 . 
         [0104]      FIG. 16  illustrates a further elaboration of the presentation process  204  shown in  FIG. 14 . In general, it provides a feed-forward capability in which some early queries  182  are conducted before some late queries  182  so that the result subsets  176  of the early queries  182  can be fed-forward in whole, in part, or after processing, for incorporation into the late queries  182 . It will be understood that there may sometimes be advantages in feeding back results from late queries  182  to better re-execute early queries  182 . There may also be situations where one wants to stagger queries  182  in time without applying feed-forward or feedback techniques. Those skilled in the art will recognize the many variations of such schemes and will understand that the process detailed below is merely exemplary. 
         [0105]    In a feed-forward first query step  234 , the web server  108  receives search terms  168  from a user, formulates those search terms  168  into appropriate queries  182  for a first group of search engines  106  to be searched, and sends the respective queries  182  to the respective search engines  106 . In general, it is expected that each of the respective search engines  106  will search the same universe of content items  154  according to its own methodology. 
         [0106]    In a feed-forward first collection step  236 , the web server  108  receives respective result subsets  176  back from each of the first group of search engines  106 . 
         [0107]    In a feed-forward second query step  238 , the web server  108  formulates the search terms  168  and the result subsets  176  received from the first group of search engines  106  into appropriate queries  182  for a second group of search engines  106  to be searched, and sends the respective queries  182  to the respective search engines  106 . 
         [0108]    In a feed-forward second collection step  240 , the web server  108  receives respective result subsets  176  back from each of the second group of search engines  106 . 
         [0109]    In a feed-forward third query step  242 , the web server  108  formulates the search terms  168  and categories  180  of the subsets  176  received from the second group of search engines  106  into appropriate queries  182  for a third group of search engines  106  to be searched, and sends the respective queries  182  to the respective search engines  106 . 
         [0110]    In a feed-forward third collection step  244 , the web server  108  receives respective result subsets  176  back from each of the third group of search engines  106 . 
         [0111]    All of the subsets  176  are then ordered in accordance with the ordering step  212  illustrated in  FIG. 14 . 
         [0112]    Thus it will be seen that the present invention teaches a method of presenting a result set  166  of a plurality of searches of a universe of content  154 , the plurality of searches returning respective result subsets  176  of indicants  158  that in union form the result set  166 , by ordering the subsets  176  with respect to each other according to scope and serving a page that presents the ordered subsets  176  together but distinctly, such that at least a portion of each subset  176  is visible and each subset  176  presents a distinct cue  178  to its respective scope. 
         [0113]    Obviously, many modifications and variations of the present invention are possible in light of the above teachings and may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described while within the scope of the appended claims. In addition, the reference numerals in the claims are merely for convenience and are not to be read in any way as limiting.