![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg99hC9Z7FN90wf-EE9M0FyjywyHfKE9yT8hDfou14ap8WjA3qo2fBe00y0TsmALTflvZr21YlHy8p9qsTk6g_f-MQlOyFYafMDnA0bGMlKenHUJzkdb91EWMTHzJwLExg8rAhZ9Q/s320/cellphonequery+WolframA2.jpg)
And I got these results:
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqqQBK2B8y8VRL30JmKAPmbOz7JAh_Ze7Hi05S1jnQ59P11JhX0Mhj1zZW_wwlSAj07pIaXzNe1v477rZG5D40Z6C0JlUc_6ONoHjKn4tHjQ_20jonoFSFbqsYinBjNdeD9OErtA/s320/cellphonequeryresults.jpg)
These look reasonable, likely 2007 or 2008 data. Also the total, max and min of the set are shown. I could have seen other data compared here, say GDP as well. The result gives you the chance to find the source of data, which are 'WolframAlpha curated'. They give you a number of possible answers, not the exact source in this case. Not completely satisfying.
Note that my question is database-like. No attempt to be English. So if I change the query to: 'Cellphones in use in ....' or any other attempts to make this a full English sentence, WolframAlpha does not understand. It also does not understand when I substitute 'laptops' for 'cellphones'. The latter appears to be a data problem.
So the experience that many people will get if they try to use some form of natural language, as claimed, may be less that satisfying.
I did get my answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment