<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><oembed><type>video</type><version>1.0</version><html>&lt;iframe src=&quot;https://www.loom.com/embed/e40d832305d542d8b93eba152072237c&quot; frameborder=&quot;0&quot; width=&quot;3456&quot; height=&quot;2592&quot; webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;</html><height>2592</height><width>3456</width><provider_name>Loom</provider_name><provider_url>https://www.loom.com</provider_url><thumbnail_height>2592</thumbnail_height><thumbnail_width>3456</thumbnail_width><thumbnail_url>https://cdn.loom.com/sessions/thumbnails/e40d832305d542d8b93eba152072237c-9d1fd95a5d628d3a.gif</thumbnail_url><duration>109.486667</duration><title>Improving Command Search Ranking Experience</title><description>This Loom discusses improving search ranking by showing a case where the current results do not meet user expectations. When pressing Control R for command search and looking for an Oz CLI command using “Oz Dev,” the results mostly show long lists of notebooks that contain “odds,” requiring heavy scrolling. The author notes that while a chip-based suggestion can look more relevant, the ranking does not mix results fairly, and users may not rely on chips because they use Control R by muscle memory for history search. The Loom concludes that better ranking is needed.</description></oembed>