Introduction to Web Search Engines
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Why We Need an Independent Index of the Web ¬ Dirk Lewandowski 50 Society of the Query Reader
Politics of Search Engines 49 René König and Miriam Rasch (eds), Society of the Query Reader: Reections on Web Search, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2014. ISBN: 978-90-818575-8-1. Why We Need an Independent Index of the Web ¬ Dirk Lewandowski 50 Society of the Query Reader Why We Need an Independent Index of the Web ¬ Dirk Lewandowski Search engine indexes function as a ‘local copy of the web’1, forming the foundation of every search engine. Search engines need to look for new documents constantly, detect changes made to existing documents, and remove documents from the index when they are no longer available on the web. When one considers that the web com- prises many billions of documents that are constantly changing, the challenge search engines face becomes clear. It is impossible to maintain a perfectly complete and current index.2 The pool of data changes thousands of times each second. No search engine can keep up with this rapid pace of change.3 The ‘local copy of the web’ can thus be viewed as the Holy Grail of web indexing at best – in practice, different search engines will always attain a varied degree of success in pursuing this goal.4 Search engines do not merely capture the text of the documents they find (as is of- ten falsely assumed). They also generate complex replicas of the documents. These representations include, for instance, information on the popularity of the document (measured by the number of times it is accessed or how many links to the document exist on the web), information extracted from the documents (for example the name of the author or the date the document was created), and an alternative text-based 1. -
Dining Hall,” “Cafeteria,” and “Campus Food Service” • Be Specific As You Learn More – E.G
THE INTERNET Conducting Internet Research Computer Applications I Martin Santos Jorge Cab Objectives • After completing this section, students will be able to: • Understand the internet • Identify the different tools for research • Use and cite references from the internet Lecturers: Martin Santos/Jorge Cab (S.P.J.C.) 2 Vocabulary List • Internet (the Net): a global connection of millions of computer networks • Browser: software that helps a user access web sites (Internet Explorer and Netscape) • Server: a computer that runs special software and sends information over the Internet when requested • World Wide Web (the Web or www.): multimedia portion of the Internet consisting of text, graphics, audio and video • URL: stands for Uniform Resource Locator. It is the website's “address” or what the user types in to make the connection • Web site: a “virtual” place on the Internet with a unique URL • Virtual: “mental” replica of something - you can’t “touch” it – need a “tool” to get to it • Web page: a place on a web site where specific information is located • Home page: main page of a web site and first page to load when a site is accessed • Hyperlink: “clickable” text or graphics – takes you from one place to another – usually underlined and shows a hand shaped icon • Hypertext: capability to “link” or “jump” to other references or cross references by clicking • Cyberspace: “electronic” universe where information from one computer connects with another • Upload: process of transferring information to a page/site on the internet • Download: process of transferring information to a computer • Search engine: a site that scans the contents of other web sites to create a large index of information • Domain (top level): code located in the URL representing the type of organization (i.e., .gov (government), .edu (education), .mil (military), .org (organization – non-profit), .com (commercial – a business – for profit) • Internet Service Provider (ISP): a company with direct connection to the Internet that grants subscribers access to various Internet services. -
Dogpile.Com First to Combine Search Results from MSN Search with Google, Yahoo and Ask Jeeves
Dogpile.com First to Combine Search Results From MSN Search with Google, Yahoo and Ask Jeeves With the Addition of MSN Search, Dogpile.com Users Can Efficiently Find More of the Web's Most Relevant Search Results in One Place BELLEVUE, Wash. – August 2, 2005 – Dogpile.com today announced that search results from MSN Search are now available on the Web's leading metasearch engine. By becoming the first to combine results from the four leading search sites—MSN Search, Google, Yahoo and Ask Jeeves—Dogpile.com gives consumers the most comprehensive view of the Web and helps them efficiently retrieve the most relevant results. The addition of MSN Search to Dogpile.com further extends Dogpile.com's differentiation from any single search engine. Most people believe search results across all four engines are the same, when, in fact, the vast majority of the results from each engine are different. According to a new study, researchers at the University of Pittsburgh and the Pennsylvania State University evaluated 12,570 random queries run on MSN Search, Google, Yahoo and Ask Jeeves. They found only 1.1 percent of the first page results are the same across all four engines. The full results of the study can be found at http://CompareSearchEngines.dogpile.com/whitepaper. "By bringing together the best results from the top engines on Dogpile.com, consumers can be confident they are receiving the most relevant results," said Brian Bowman, vice president of marketing and product management for InfoSpace Search & Directory. Dogpile.com has built a tool that allows consumers to compare the results of the leading engines for themselves. -
A Study on Vertical and Broad-Based Search Engines
International Journal of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology IJLTET Special Issue- ICRACSC-2016 , pp.087-093 e-ISSN: 2278-621X A STUDY ON VERTICAL AND BROAD-BASED SEARCH ENGINES M.Swathi1 and M.Swetha2 Abstract-Vertical search engines or Domain-specific search engines[1][2] are becoming increasingly popular because they offer increased accuracy and extra features not possible with general, Broad-based search engines or Web-wide search engines. The paper focuses on the survey of domain specific search engine which is becoming more popular as compared to Web- Wide Search Engines as they are difficult to maintain and time consuming .It is also difficult to provide appropriate documents to represent the target data. We also listed various vertical search engines and Broad-based search engines. Index terms: Domain specific search, vertical search engines, broad based search engines. I. INTRODUCTION The Web has become a very rich source of information for almost any field, ranging from music to histories, from sports to movies, from science to culture, and many more. However, it has become increasingly difficult to search for desired information on the Web. Users are facing the problem of information overload , in which a search on a general-purpose search engine such as Google (www.google.com) results in thousands of hits.Because a user cannot specify a search domain (e.g. medicine, music), a search query may bring up Web pages both within and outside the desired domain. Example 1: A user searching for “cancer” may get Web pages related to the disease as well as those related to the Zodiac sign. -
Evaluation of Web-Based Search Engines Using User-Effort Measures
Evaluation of Web-Based Search Engines Using User-Effort Measures Muh-Chyun Tang and Ying Sun 4 Huntington St. School of Information, Communication and Library Studies Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, U.S.A. [email protected] [email protected] Abstract This paper presents a study of the applicability of three user-effort-sensitive evaluation measures —“first 20 full precision,” “search length,” and “rank correlation”—on four Web-based search engines (Google, AltaVista, Excite and Metacrawler). The authors argue that these measures are better alternatives than precision and recall in Web search situations because of their emphasis on the quality of ranking. Eight sets of search topics were collected from four Ph.D. students in four different disciplines (biochemistry, industrial engineering, economics, and urban planning). Each participant was asked to provide two topics along with the corresponding query terms. Their relevance and credibility judgment of the Web pages were then used to compare the performance of the search engines using these three measures. The results show consistency among these three ranking evaluation measures, more so between “first 20 full precision” and search length than between rank correlation and the other two measures. Possible reasons for rank correlation’s disagreement with the other two measures are discussed. Possible future research to improve these measures is also addressed. Introduction The explosive growth of information on the World Wide Web poses a challenge to traditional information retrieval (IR) research. Other than the sheer amount of information, some structural factors make searching for relevant and quality information on the Web a formidable task. -
Distributed Indexing/Searching Workshop Agenda, Attendee List, and Position Papers
Distributed Indexing/Searching Workshop Agenda, Attendee List, and Position Papers Held May 28-19, 1996 in Cambridge, Massachusetts Sponsored by the World Wide Web Consortium Workshop co-chairs: Michael Schwartz, @Home Network Mic Bowman, Transarc Corp. This workshop brings together a cross-section of people concerned with distributed indexing and searching, to explore areas of common concern where standards might be defined. The Call For Participation1 suggested particular focus on repository interfaces that support efficient and powerful distributed indexing and searching. There was a great deal of interest in this workshop. Because of our desire to limit attendance to a workable size group while maximizing breadth of attendee backgrounds, we limited attendance to one person per position paper, and furthermore we limited attendance to one person per institution. In some cases, attendees submitted multiple position papers, with the intention of discussing each of their projects or ideas that were relevant to the workshop. We had not anticipated this interpretation of the Call For Participation; our intention was to use the position papers to select participants, not to provide a forum for enumerating ideas and projects. As a compromise, we decided to choose among the submitted papers and allow multiple position papers per person and per institution, but to restrict attendance as noted above. Hence, in the paper list below there are some cases where one author or institution has multiple position papers. 1 http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Search/960528/cfp.html 1 Agenda The Distributed Indexing/Searching Workshop will span two days. The first day's goal is to identify areas for potential standardization through several directed discussion sessions. -
How to Choose a Search Engine Or Directory
How to Choose a Search Engine or Directory Fields & File Types If you want to search for... Choose... Audio/Music AllTheWeb | AltaVista | Dogpile | Fazzle | FindSounds.com | Lycos Music Downloads | Lycos Multimedia Search | Singingfish Date last modified AllTheWeb Advanced Search | AltaVista Advanced Web Search | Exalead Advanced Search | Google Advanced Search | HotBot Advanced Search | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Domain/Site/URL AllTheWeb Advanced Search | AltaVista Advanced Web Search | AOL Advanced Search | Google Advanced Search | Lycos Advanced Search | MSN Search Search Builder | SearchEdu.com | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search File Format AllTheWeb Advanced Web Search | AltaVista Advanced Web Search | AOL Advanced Search | Exalead Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Geographic location Exalead Advanced Search | HotBot Advanced Search | Lycos Advanced Search | MSN Search Search Builder | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Images AllTheWeb | AltaVista | The Amazing Picture Machine | Ditto | Dogpile | Fazzle | Google Image Search | IceRocket | Ixquick | Mamma | Picsearch Language AllTheWeb Advanced Web Search | AOL Advanced Search | Exalead Advanced Search | Google Language Tools | HotBot Advanced Search | iBoogie Advanced Web Search | Lycos Advanced Search | MSN Search Search Builder | Teoma Advanced Search | Yahoo Advanced Web Search Multimedia & video All TheWeb | AltaVista | Dogpile | Fazzle | IceRocket | Singingfish | Yahoo Video Search Page Title/URL AOL Advanced -
Analysis of Query Keywords of Sports-Related Queries Using Visualization and Clustering
Analysis of Query Keywords of Sports-Related Queries Using Visualization and Clustering Jin Zhang and Dietmar Wolfram School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI 53201. E-mail: {jzhang, dwolfram}@uwm.edu Peiling Wang School of Information Sciences, College of Communication and Information, University of Tennessee at Knoxville, Knoxville, TN 37996–0341. E-mail: [email protected] The authors investigated 11 sports-related query key- the user’s request includes the client Internet Protocol (IP) words extracted from a public search engine query log address, request date/time, page requested, HTTP code, bytes to better understand sports-related information seeking served, user agent, referrer, and so on. The data are kept in on the Internet. After the query log contents were cleaned and query data were parsed, popular sports-related key- a standard format in a transaction log file (Hallam-Baker & words were identified, along with frequently co-occurring Behlendorf, 2008). query terms associated with the identified keywords. Although a transaction log comprises rich data, including Relationships among each sports-related focus keyword browsing times and traversal paths, it is the queries directly and its related keywords were characterized and grouped submitted by users that have attracted the most research using multidimensional scaling (MDS) in combination with traditional hierarchical clustering methods. The two attention. Query data contain keywords that reflect users’ approaches were synthesized in a visual context by high- wide-ranging information needs. Query logs have been ana- lighting the results of the hierarchical clustering analysis lyzed from a variety of sources with different emphases and in the visual MDS configuration. -
Towards the Ontology Web Search Engine
TOWARDS THE ONTOLOGY WEB SEARCH ENGINE Olegs Verhodubs [email protected] Abstract. The project of the Ontology Web Search Engine is presented in this paper. The main purpose of this paper is to develop such a project that can be easily implemented. Ontology Web Search Engine is software to look for and index ontologies in the Web. OWL (Web Ontology Languages) ontologies are meant, and they are necessary for the functioning of the SWES (Semantic Web Expert System). SWES is an expert system that will use found ontologies from the Web, generating rules from them, and will supplement its knowledge base with these generated rules. It is expected that the SWES will serve as a universal expert system for the average user. Keywords: Ontology Web Search Engine, Search Engine, Crawler, Indexer, Semantic Web I. INTRODUCTION The technological development of the Web during the last few decades has provided us with more information than we can comprehend or manage effectively [1]. Typical uses of the Web involve seeking and making use of information, searching for and getting in touch with other people, reviewing catalogs of online stores and ordering products by filling out forms, and viewing adult material. Keyword-based search engines such as YAHOO, GOOGLE and others are the main tools for using the Web, and they provide with links to relevant pages in the Web. Despite improvements in search engine technology, the difficulties remain essentially the same [2]. Firstly, relevant pages, retrieved by search engines, are useless, if they are distributed among a large number of mildly relevant or irrelevant pages. -
Instrumentalizing the Sources of Attraction. How Russia Undermines Its Own Soft Power
INSTRUMENTALIZING THE SOURCES OF ATTRACTION. HOW RUSSIA UNDERMINES ITS OWN SOFT POWER By Vasile Rotaru Abstract The 2011-2013 domestic protests and the 2013-2015 Ukraine crisis have brought to the Russian politics forefront an increasing preoccupation for the soft power. The concept started to be used in official discourses and documents and a series of measures have been taken both to avoid the ‘dangers’ of and to streamline Russia’s soft power. This dichotomous approach towards the ‘power of attraction’ have revealed the differences of perception of the soft power by Russian officials and the Western counterparts. The present paper will analyse Russia’s efforts to control and to instrumentalize the sources of soft power, trying to assess the effectiveness of such an approach. Keywords: Russian soft power, Russian foreign policy, public diplomacy, Russian mass media, Russian internet Introduction The use of term soft power is relatively new in the Russian political circles, however, it has become recently increasingly popular among the Russian analysts, policy makers and politicians. The term per se was used for the first time in Russian political discourse in February 2012 by Vladimir Putin. In the presidential election campaign, the then candidate Putin drew attention to the fact that soft power – “a set of tools and methods to achieve foreign policy goals without the use of arms but by exerting information and other levers of influence” is used frequently by “big countries, international blocks or corporations” “to develop and provoke extremist, separatist and nationalistic attitudes, to manipulate the public and to directly interfere in the domestic policy of sovereign countries” (Putin 2012). -
Web-Page Indexing Based on the Prioritize Ontology Terms
Web-page Indexing based on the Prioritize Ontology Terms Sukanta Sinha1, 4, Rana Dattagupta2, Debajyoti Mukhopadhyay3, 4 1Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., Victoria Park Building, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, India [email protected] 2Computer Science Dept., Jadavpur University, Kolkata 700032, India [email protected] 3Information Technology Dept., Maharashtra Institute of Technology, Pune 411038, India [email protected] 4WIDiCoReL Research Lab, Green Tower, C-9/1, Golf Green, Kolkata 700095, India Abstract. In this world, globalization has become a basic and most popular human trend. To globalize information, people are going to publish the docu- ments in the internet. As a result, information volume of internet has become huge. To handle that huge volume of information, Web searcher uses search engines. The Web-page indexing mechanism of a search engine plays a big role to retrieve Web search results in a faster way from the huge volume of Web re- sources. Web researchers have introduced various types of Web-page indexing mechanism to retrieve Web-pages from Web-page repository. In this paper, we have illustrated a new approach of design and development of Web-page index- ing. The proposed Web-page indexing mechanism has applied on domain spe- cific Web-pages and we have identified the Web-page domain based on an On- tology. In our approach, first we prioritize the Ontology terms that exist in the Web-page content then apply our own indexing mechanism to index that Web- page. The main advantage of storing an index is to optimize the speed and per- formance while finding relevant documents from the domain specific search engine storage area for a user given search query. -
Functional Differences Between Northern Light Singlepoint And
Functional Differences Between Northern Light SinglePoint and Microsoft SharePoint For Strategic Research Portals Northern Light® Whitepaper April 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Background On Northern Light SinglePoint ................................................................................................................... 2 Third-Party Licensed External Content ...................................................................................................................... 3 Internally Produced Research Content ...................................................................................................................... 4 User Authentication................................................................................................................................................... 4 Differences Between Northern Light SinglePoint and Microsoft SharePoint ................................................................ 5 Investment in a Research-optimized Portal and Supporting Systems ....................................................................... 5 Ability To Technically Integrate With Third-Parties To Index Research Content ....................................................... 6 Content Liability ......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Document Security Conventions Reflecting Licensing Arrangements ....................................................................... 7 Benefit of Having the