We're only indexing computer and information science related articles right now. One of the interface's most obvious failures is communicating that- we'll try to improve the messaging and make that more clear. Coverage of material in philosophy is down the road.
What about following keywords in Scholrly doesn't satisfy what you need?
Scholrly omits big names like Hartmann and Talbott. Most of the author section is actually filled with non-people.
The publications section doesn't show me citation count or any reason why it might be relevant such as keyword highlights or score. I'd have a very hard time trusting these results that have such clear omissions.
Why do I want to look at an empty page with a picture of an owl? (Pearl by the way is a rockstar CS professor with 400+ papers and nearly 50k citations - you list a single paper of his)
My biggest pain point of academic search is knowing where I should spend my limited time researching. GS does an OK job of pointing me in the right direction but scholrly wastes my time with numerous dead ends.
On search context- very good point. We're putting together a couple graphical summaries to try for profiles, as well as exposing keywords on search results soon. I think you're absolutely right about result trustworthiness and backing up why something is relevant in a meaningful way.
I'd love to include results from philosophy and related fields, but we just don't have data sources for them yet. Right now, I think we need to do a better job hammering in that the data we've indexed is in the computer and information science arena. We don't have the resources of all the other players in the field, so I think a niche strategy is important. Are there any particularly great repositories for bibliographic or full-text data in philosophy?
On Judea Pearl- you're right, we messed up! Do consider, though, that he's claimed his Google Scholar Citations profile. We've done all of our profile inference automatically. Sometimes that leads to a bunch of author pages that need to be merged, like in Pearl's case- we have all his papers, but didn't know they were written by the same real-world person, so they're fragmented (http://scholr.ly/results/?q=judea+pearl&x=0&y=0&...). Other times, we have more complete profiles than Google, because many academics don't claim their Google Scholar Citations profiles.
It's an ongoing concern, so we'll be spending a bunch of time on this problem (called entity disambiguation in the lit) as well as upgrading venues, publishers, etc to clickable first-class citizens before our next major release.
Thanks so much for your feedback- hopefully I'll be able to post again soon with improvements.
What about following keywords in Scholrly doesn't satisfy what you need?