Advertisement

Aggregating Web Search Results

  • Marek KopelEmail author
  • Maksim Buben
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11431)

Abstract

In this paper a method for aggregating Web search results is proposed. The aggregator results are compared with the results of most popular search engines: Google, Bing and Yandex. There are 3 stages of the comparison, one for each of the languages: English, Polish and Russian. The quality of the aggregator search results is tested based on user preferences and measured with normalized discounted cumulative gain (nDCG).

Keywords

Aggregation Metasearch SERP Search engine Google Bing Yandex 

References

  1. 1.
    Brorsson, M., Lindhom, H.: The best place to hide a dead body is page 2 on Google search results (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Colgrove, C., Martin, G., Campanini, J.: Simple web search. U.S. Patent 8,868,537, 21 October 2014Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Croft, W.B., Metzler, D., Strohman, T.: Search Engines: Information Retrieval in Practice, vol. 283. Addison-Wesley Reading, Boston (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glover, E.J., Lawrence, S., Birmingham, W.P., Giles, C.L.: Architecture of a metasearch engine that supports user information needs. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 210–216. ACM (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ishii, H., Tempo, R.: The PageRank problem, multiagent consensus, and web aggregation: a systems and control viewpoint. IEEE Control Syst. 34(3), 34–53 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jansen, B.J., Spink, A.: Investigating customer click through behaviour with integrated sponsored and nonsponsored results. Int. J. Internet Mark. Advertising 5(1), 74 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Järvelin, K., Kekäläinen, J.: Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. (TOIS) 20(4), 422–446 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Newman, E., Lockett, J.: Dynamic aggregation and display of contextually relevant content. U.S. Patent 7,917,840, 29 March 2011Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Patel, B., Shah, D.: Ranking algorithm for meta search engine. IJAERS Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Stud. 2(1), 39–40 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sherkhonov, E., Cuenca Grau, B., Kharlamov, E., Kostylev, E.V.: Semantic faceted search with aggregation and recursion. In: d’Amato, C., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10587, pp. 594–610. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68288-4_35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang, Y., Wang, L., Li, Y., He, D., Chen, W., Liu, T.Y.: A theoretical analysis of NDCG ranking measures. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference on Learning Theory (COLT 2013), vol. 8 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yun, J.M., He, Y., Elnikety, S., Ren, S.: Optimal aggregation policy for reducing tail latency of web search. In: Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 63–72. ACM (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Computer Science and ManagementWroclaw University of Science and TechnologyWroclawPoland

Personalised recommendations