49 granted search-engine patents plus 2 published applications by Google researcher Steven D. Baker, covering query understanding (synonyms, n-gram, geographic, cross-language), query refinement, meaningful stopword detection, answer passage scoring (featured snippets), query–document similarity, list co-occurrence, and embedding-based personalized search.
About the Steven Baker — Google Search Patents track
49 granted search-engine patents plus 2 published applications by Google researcher Steven D. Baker, covering query understanding (synonyms, n-gram, geographic, cross-language), query refinement, meaningful stopword detection, answer passage scoring (featured snippets), query–document similarity, list co-occurrence, and embedding-based personalized search.
Query Understanding — Synonyms & Related Terms
- Determining query term synonyms within query context (US 7,636,714 · 2009)
- Identifying a synonym with n-gram agreement for a query phrase (US 7,925,498 · 2011)
- Identifying a synonym with N-gram agreement for a query phrase (continuation) (US 8,321,201 · 2012)
- Document-based synonym generation (US 7,890,521 · 2011)
- Document-based synonym generation (continuation) (US 8,161,041 · 2012)
- Document-based synonym generation (continuation) (US 8,392,413 · 2013)
- Document-based synonym generation (continuation) (US 8,762,370 · 2014)
- Using geographic data to identify correlated geographic synonyms (US 8,041,730 · 2011)
- Using geographic data to identify correlated geographic synonyms (2012 continuation) (US 8,326,866 · 2012)
- Using geographic data to identify correlated geographic synonyms (US8417721) (US 8,417,721 · 2013)
- Using geographic data to identify correlated geographic synonyms (US8484188) (US 8,484,188 · 2013)
- Using geographic data to identify correlated geographic synonyms (US8527538) (US 8,527,538 · 2013)
- Abbreviation detection for common synonym generation (US 8,122,022 · 2012)
- Longest-common-subsequence detection for common synonyms (US 8,001,136 · 2011)
- Method and apparatus for generating lexical synonyms for query terms (US 9,183,297 · 2015)
- Ensuring that a synonym for a query phrase does not drop information present in the query phrase (US 8,661,012 · 2014)
- Identifying related terms in different languages (US 8,798,988 · 2014)
Query Refinement & Suggestions
- System and method for providing search query refinements (US 8,086,619 · 2011)
- Systems and methods for providing search query refinements (2011 continuation) (US 8,065,316 · 2011)
- Systems and methods for providing search query refinements (2013 continuation) (US 8,504,584 · 2013)
- System and method for providing search query refinements (2014 continuation) (US 8,645,407 · 2014)
- Systems and methods for providing search query refinements (2016 continuation) (US 9,495,443 · 2016)
- System and method for providing search query refinements (2017 continuation) (US 9,552,388 · 2017)
- Systems and methods for providing search query refinements (2019 continuation) (US 10,223,439 · 2019)
Stopwords & Stop-Phrase Detection
- Locating meaningful stopwords or stop-phrases in keyword-based retrieval systems (US 7,409,383 · 2008)
- Locating meaningful stopwords (2011 continuation) (US 7,945,579 · 2011)
- Locating meaningful stopwords (2012 continuation) (US 8,214,385 · 2012)
- Locating meaningful stopwords (2013 continuation) (US 8,473,510 · 2013)
- Locating meaningful stopwords (2014 continuation) (US 8,626,787 · 2014)
- Locating meaningful stopwords (2015 continuation) (US 8,965,919 · 2015)
- Locating meaningful stopwords (2017 continuation) (US 9,817,920 · 2017)
- Locating meaningful stopwords (2019 continuation) (US 10,452,718 · 2019)
Answer Passages & Question Understanding
- Scoring candidate answer passages (US 9,940,367 · 2018)
- Scoring candidate answer passages (2020 continuation) (US 10,783,156 · 2020)
- Context scoring adjustments for answer passages (US 9,959,315 · 2018)
- Context scoring adjustments for answer passages (2022 continuation) (US 11,409,748 · 2022)
- Implicit question query identification (US 9,898,554 · 2018)
- Images for query answers (US 10,691,746 · 2020)
Query–Document Similarity & Generation
- Query generation using structural similarity between documents (US 8,346,792 · 2013)
- Query generation using structural similarity between documents (2015 continuation) (US 9,092,479 · 2015)
- Query generation using structural similarity between documents (2016 continuation) (US 9,436,747 · 2016)
Common Co-Occurring Elements (Semantic Clusters)
- Identifying common co-occurring elements in lists (US 8,037,086 · 2011)
- Identifying common co-occurring elements in lists (2012 continuation) (US 8,285,738 · 2012)
- Identifying common co-occurring elements in lists (2013 continuation) (US 8,463,782 · 2013)
- Identifying common co-occurring elements in lists (2016 continuation) (US 9,239,823 · 2016)
Embeddings, Interests & Personalized Search
- Golden embeddings (US 11,294,974 · 2022)
- Validating interests for a search and feed service (US 11,200,288 · 2021)
- User interest modeling (US App. 15/445,927 · 2018)
- Enhanced search for generating a content feed (US App. 15/445,931 · 2018)
Why this inventor matters
Each inventor track inside the Nizam SEO War Room patents archive isolates one engineer's research arc — typically a decade or more of continuations, divisionals, and follow-up patents on a coherent research thread. Reading by inventor (rather than by topic) recovers the narrative: how the original disclosure evolved, what the continuations added, which claims got carved out into divisional applications, and how the thread eventually intersected with other research lines at Google or Microsoft. This is how working SEOs build durable intuition about search-engine internals — not by memorizing claim language, but by following the research bibliography that shipped the algorithms we now optimize against.
How to read this track
Start with the earliest filing — it sets the foundational disclosure. Continuations refine the claims; divisional applications split out separable inventions; the follow-up patents tend to introduce performance optimizations, edge-case handling, or downstream integration with other systems. Each patent on this site is annotated with the ranking surface it touches — query understanding, document retrieval, ranking, behavioral signals, knowledge graph, or AI search — so the practitioner can map the research back to the algorithm output observed on live SERPs.