Category Archives: Recommendations

The Open Book Genome Project

We’ve all heard the advice, don’t judge a book by its cover. But then how should we go about identifying books which are good for us? The secret depends on understanding two things:

  1. What is a book?
  2. What are our preferences?

We can’t easily answer the second question without understanding the first one. But we can help by being good library listeners and trying to provide tools, such as the Reading Log and Lists, to help patrons record and discover books they like. Since everyone is different, the second question is key to understanding why patrons like these books and making Open Library as useful as possible to patrons.

What is a book?

As we’ve explored before, determining whether something is a book is a deceptively difficult task, even for librarians. It’s a bound thing made of paper, right? But what about audiobooks and ebooks? Ok, books have ISBNs right? But many formats can have ISBNs and books published before 1967 won’t have one. And what about yearbooks? Is a yearbook a book? Is a dictionary a book? What about a phonebook? A price guide? An atlas? There are entire organizations, like the San Francisco Center for the Book, dedicated to exploring and pushing the limits of the book format.

In some ways, it’s easier to answer this question about humans than books because every human is built according to a specific genetic blueprint called DNA. We all have DNA, what make us unique are the variations of more than 20,000 genes that our DNA are made of, which help encode for characteristics like hair and eye color. In 1990, an international research group called the Human Genome Project (HGP) began sequencing the human genome to definitively uncover, “nature’s complete genetic blueprint for building a human being”. The result, which completed in 2003, was a compelling answer of, “what is a human?”.

Nine years later, Will Glaser & Tim Westergren drew inspiration from HGP and launched a similar effort called the Music Genome Project, using trained experts to classify and label music according to a taxonomy of characteristics, like genre and tempo. This system became the engine which powers song recommendations for Pandora Radio.

Circa 2003, Aaron Stanton, Matt Monroe, Sidian Jones, and Dan Bowen adapted the idea of Pandora to books, creating a book recommendation service called BookLamp. Under the hood, they devised a Book Genome Project which combined computers and crowds to “identify, track, measure, and study the multitude of features that make up a book”.

Their system analyzed books and surfaced insights about their structure, themes, age-appropriateness, and even pace, bringing us withing grasping distance of the answer to our question: What is a book?

BookLamps-Theme-Currents-for-Carrie

Sadly, the project did not release their data, was acquired by Apple in 2014, and subsequently discontinued. But they left an exciting treasure map for others to follow.

And follow, others did. In 2006, a project called the Open Music Genome Project attempted to create a public, open, community alternative to Pandora’s Music Genome Project. We thought this was a beautiful gesture and a great opportunity for Open Library; perhaps we could facilitate public book insights which any project in the ecosystem could use to create their own answer for, “what is a book?”. We also found inspiration from complimentary projects like StoryGraph, which elegantly crowd sources book tags from patrons to help you, “choose your next book based on your mood and your favorite topics and themes”, HaithiTrust Research Center (HTRC) which has led the way in making book data available to researchers, and the Open Syllabus Project which is surfacing useful academic books based on their usage across college curriculum.

Introducing the Open Book Genome Project

Over the last several months, we’ve been talking to communities, conducting research, speaking with some of the teams behind these innovative projects, and building experiments to shape a non-profit adaptation of these approaches called the Open Book Genome Project (OBGP).

Our hope is that this Open Book Genome Project will help responsibly make book data more useful and accessible to the public: to power book recommendations, to compare books based on their similarities and differences, to produce more accurate summaries, to calculate reading levels to match audiences to books, to surface citations and urls mentioned within books, and more.

OBGP hopes to achieve these things by employing a two pronged approach which readers may continue learning about in following two blog posts:

  1. The Sequencer – a community-engineered bot which reads millions of Internet Archive books and extracts key insights for public consumption.
  2. Community Reviews – a new crowd-sourced book tagging system which empowers readers to collaboratively classify & share structured reviews of books.

Or hear an overview of the OBGP in this half-hour tech talk:

Introducing: Community Reviews

You can now publicly review books using structured book #tags on Open Library with Community Reviews. Take a look, try it out, and send us feedback!


Many social book websites including Goodreads & LibraryThing feature text reviews from the community. Why hasn’t Open Library?

As a non-profit library service with a small staff, there are three reasons we’ve resisted the urge to add text reviews to Open Library. First and foremost, we feel strongly about preserving Open Library as an inclusive, safe, neutral place where readers can trust the information they receive. Some opinionated reviews, even though valid, may contend with this goal. Secondly, we’re cautious about adding features which may require a large time investment to moderate well. We’d rather spend our time making it easier for people across the globe to find books in their native languages than sink all of our time reviewing spam. Finally, there are indeed already several websites which feature text reviews. We’re excited to link patrons to these resources and think our time may be better served exploring new ways of adding unique value back to the book ecosystem.

This all said, reviews are one of the most requested features by book lovers on Open Library and we feel its important readers to have their voices heard. So what are our options?

A review of reviews

One super-power of text reviews is that they are unstructured. Their open-ended format allows reviewers to express very nuanced and deep thoughts like, how impressively the male author Arthur Golden was able to portray the emotional turmoil of the female characters portrayed in Memoirs of A Geisha. This super-power does come with a trade-off. It can be challenging to compare reviews and know which should be trusted; two reviews may have completely diverging styles or focus. One reviewer may be reacting to the story line while another may be critiquing the book’s pace. Reviews are often not easily digestible. A lot of information is lost when one tries to compress a review into a single star rating. Because of these challenges with “digestibility”, it’s also challenging to summarize text reviews as data which may be used to help people discover new books. Amazon has some techniques which we considered:

A collaborative approach

How can Open Library empower readers to share their impressions about books in a new way, facilitate useful reviews which are structured and easily digestible, while maintaining a safe and neutral library landscape?

Open Library’s collaborative approach, which we’re calling Community Reviews, borrows from an old (now defunct) project called BookLamp and a more recent project called StoryGraph, which let participants use tags to vote on & review various aspects of books like pace, genre, mood, and more:

StoryGraph crowd sources tags like genre and mood from the community and use this information to help readers find the right book for them
BookLamp used a hybrid of robots and crowd sourcing to identify themes and topics within books.

The more participants who vote using review tags, the more accurate and meaningful the review becomes for the community. Instead of sifting through dozens of text reviews, Community Reviews gives readers a birds-eye view across many publicly listed dimensions they might care about like Pace, Enjoyability, Clarity, Difficulty, Breadth, Genre, Mood, Impressions, Length, Credibility, Text Features, Content Warnings, Terminology, and Purpose.

Here’s what Open Library Community Reviews looks like:

By clicking “+ Add your community review”, any logged in reader may submit their own public, anonymous reviews:

Building Together

Community Reviews features a public schema which anyone may reference or propose changes to. It’s a work in progress and will undoubtedly need the community’s feedback to become useful over time.

Feedback

Community Reviews is a beta work in progress and we expect it to change drastically over the coming weeks based on feedback from our community. We also anticipate issues and bugs may emerge — you can help by reporting bugs and issues here.

We do have every intention for Community Reviews to be included (in an anonymized form) in our public monthly data dumps for the benefit of our community and via our APIs, though this may take some time to implement.

As the number of Community Reviews increases, our plan is to include them in our search engine so you have ever more ways to identify the best books for you.

We know many patrons would still love to see text reviews on Open Library and that Community Reviews isn’t a replacement for every use case. We sincerely appreciate this and still, we hope that readers will find this new feature valuable and provide us with feedback to improve it over time.

Thanks

We’d like to sincerely thank Jim Champ who recently joined as staff member on Open Library and whose leadership was indispensable in bringing this feature to life. Thank you to you Drini Cami, also staff at Open Library, for his contributions to improving the user experience. If you hate the idea or execution, blame Mek but do give us feedback to improve.