Whither social networks for web search?

Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining

Volumn 2015-August, Issue , 2015, Pages 1661-1670

  Agrawal, Rakesh ^a   Golshan, Behzad ^b   Papalexakis, Evangelos ^c  

^a Data Insights Laboratories   (United States)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bing; Google; Search engine; Search result comparison; Social media search; Twitter; Web search

Indexed keywords

BINS; DATA MINING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; SEARCH ENGINES; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE); WEBSITES;

BING; GOOGLE; RESULT COMPARISON; SOCIAL MEDIA SEARCHES; TWITTER; WEB SEARCHES;

WORLD WIDE WEB;

EID: 84954125666     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2783258.2788571     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (54)

1. Amazon Mechanical Turk, Requester Best Practices Guide. Amazon Web Services, June 2011.
2. R. Agrawal, B. Golshan, and E. Papalexakis. A study of distinctiveness in web results of two search engines. In 24th international conference on World Wide Web, Web Science Track. ACM, 2015.
3. O. Alonso, C. Carson, D. Gerster, X. Ji, and S. U. Nabar. Detecting uninteresting content in text streams. In SIGIR Crowdsourcing for Search Evaluation Workshop, 2010.
4. A. Anandkumar, R. Ge, D. Hsu, S. M. Kakade, and M. Telgarsky. Tensor decompositions for learning latent variable models. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 15(1):2773-2832, 2014.
5. D. Antoniades, I. Polakis, G. Kontaxis, E. Athanasopoulos, S. Ioannidis, E. P. Markatos, and T. Karagiannis. we.b: The web of short URLs. In 20th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 715-724. ACM, 2011.
6. Z. Bar-Yossef, I. Keidar, and U. Schonfeld. Do not crawl in the DUST: different urls with similar text. ACM Transactions on the Web, 3(1):3, 2009.
7. R. Batool, A. M. Khattak, J. Maqbool, and S. Lee. Precise tweet classification and sentiment analysis. In IEEE/ACIS 12th international conference on Computer and Information Science, pages 461-466. IEEE, 2013.
8. K. Bharat and A. Broder. A technique for measuring the relative size and overlap of public web search engines. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30(1):379-388, 1998.
9. D. M. Blei, A. Y. Ng, and M. I. Jordan. Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:993-1022, 2003.
10. A. Broder. A taxonomy of web search. ACM Sigir forum, 36(2):3-10, 2002.
11. M. Busch, K. Gade, B. Larson, P. Lok, S. Luckenbill, and J. Lin. Earlybird: Real-time search at Twitter. In IEEE 28th international conference on Data Engineering, pages 1360-1369. IEEE, 2012.
12. C. Castillo, M. Mendoza, and B. Poblete. Information credibility on twitter. In 20th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 675-684. ACM, 2011.
13. C. L. A. Clarke, N. Craswell, I. Soboroff, and E. M. Voorhees. Overview of the TREC 2011 web track. Technical report, NIST, 2011.
14. W. Ding and G. Marchionini. A comparative study of web search service performance. In ASIS Annual Meeting, Volume 33, pages 136-42. ERIC, 1996.
15. A. Dong, R. Zhang, P. Kolari, J. Bai, F. Diaz, Y. Chang, Z. Zheng, and H. Zha. Time is of the essence: improving recency ranking using twitter data. In 19th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 331-340. ACM, 2010.
16. Y. Duan, L. Jiang, T. Qin, M. Zhou, and H.-Y. Shum. An empirical study on learning to rank of tweets. In 23rd international conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 295-303. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010.
17. W. DuBay. The principles of readability. Impact Information, 2004.
18. E. Enge, S. Spencer, J. Stricchiola, and R. Fishkin. The art of SEO. O'Reilly, 2012.
19. Federal Communications Commission. Editorializing by broadcast licensees. Washington, DC: GPO, 1949.
20. J. L. Fleiss. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological bulletin, 76(5):378, 1971.
21. S. Gauch and G. Wang. Information fusion with profusion. In 1st World Conference of the Web Society, 1996.
22. A. Hannak, P. Sapiezynski, A. Molavi Kakhki, B. Krishnamurthy, D. Lazer, A. Mislove, and C. Wilson. Measuring personalization of web search. In 22nd international conference on World Wide Web, pages 527-538. ACM, 2013.
23. R. A. Harshman. Foundations of the parafac procedure: models and conditions for an "explanatory" multimodal factor analysis. Technical report, UCLA, 1970.
24. T. Joachims. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data mining, pages 133-142. ACM, 2002.
25. U. Kang, E. Papalexakis, A. Harpale, and C. Faloutsos. Gigatensor: scaling tensor analysis up by 100 times - algorithms and discoveries. In 18th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data mining, pages 316-324. ACM, 2012.
26. G. R. Klare and B. Buck. Know Your Reader: The scientific approach to readability. Heritage House, 1954.
27. T. G. Kolda and B. W. Bader. Tensor decompositions and applications. SIAM review, 51(3):455-500, 2009.
28. H. Kwak, C. Lee, H. Park, and S. Moon. What is twitter, a social network or a news media? In 19th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 591-600. ACM, 2010.
29. H. W. Lauw, A. Ntoulas, and K. Kenthapadi. Estimating the quality of postings in the real-time web. In Proc. of SSM conference, 2010.
30. S. Lawrence and C. L. Giles. Searching the world wide web. Science, 280(5360):98-100, 1998.
31. S. H. Lee, S. J. Kim, and S. H. Hong. On URL normalization. In Computational Science and Its Applications-ICCSA 2005, pages 1076-1085. Springer, 2005.
32. T. Lei, R. Cai, J.-M. Yang, Y. Ke, X. Fan, and L. Zhang. A pattern tree-based approach to learning URL normalization rules. In 19th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 611-620. ACM, 2010.
33. V. Maltese, F. Giunchiglia, K. Denecke, P. Lewis, C. Wallner, A. Baldry, and D. Madalli. On the interdisciplinary foundations of diversity. University of Trento, 2009.
34. M.-C. Marcos and C. González-Caro. Comportamiento de los usuarios en la página de resultados de los buscadores. un estudio basado en eye tracking. El profesional de la información, 19(4):348-358, 2010.
35. J. Martinez-Romo and L. Araujo. Detecting malicious tweets in trending topics using a statistical analysis of language. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(8):2992-3000, 2013.
36. W. Meng, C. Yu, and K.-L. Liu. Building efficient and effective metasearch engines. ACM Computing Surveys, 34(1):48-89, 2002.
37. K. Nishida, T. Hoshide, and K. Fujimura. Improving tweet stream classification by detecting changes in word probability. In 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval), pages 971-980. ACM, 2012.
38. K. Purcell, J. Brenner, and L. Rainie. Search engine use 2012. Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2012.
39. M. S. Rahman, T.-K. Huang, H. V. Madhyastha, and M. Faloutsos. Efficient and scalable socware detection in online social networks. In USENIX Security Symposium, pages 663-678, 2012.
40. D. M. Romero, W. Galuba, S. Asur, and B. A. Huberman. Influence and passivity in social media. In Machine learning and knowledge discovery in databases, pages 18-33. Springer, 2011.
41. T. Rowlands, D. Hawking, and R. Sankaranarayana. New-web search with microblog annotations. In 19th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 1293-1296. ACM, 2010.
42. I. Santos, I. Miñambres-Marcos, C. Laorden, P. Galán-García, A. Santamaría-Ibirika, and P. G. Bringas. Twitter content-based spam filtering. In International Joint Conference SOCO'13-CISIS'13-ICEUTE'13, pages 449-458. Springer, 2014.
43. E. Selberg and O. Etzioni. Multi-service search and comparison using the metacrawler. In 4th international conference on World Wide Web, 1995.
44. A. Spink, B. J. Jansen, C. Blakely, and S. Koshman. A study of results overlap and uniqueness among major web search engines. Information Processing & Management, 42(5):1379-1391, 2006.
45. B. Sriram, D. Fuhry, E. Demir, H. Ferhatosmanoglu, and M. Demirbas. Short text classification in twitter to improve information filtering. In 33rd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 841-842. ACM, 2010.
46. N. J. Stroud and A. Muddiman. Exposure to news and diverse views in the internet age. ISJLP, 8:605, 2012.
47. H. Takemura and K. Tajima. Tweet classification based on their lifetime duration. In 21st ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management, pages 2367-2370. ACM, 2012.
48. K. Tao, F. Abel, C. Hauff, and G.-J. Houben. Twinder: a search engine for twitter streams. In Web Engineering, pages 153-168. Springer, 2012.
49. J. Teevan, D. Ramage, and M. R. Morris. # twittersearch: a comparison of microblog search and web search. In 4th ACM international conference on Web Search and Data Mining, pages 35-44. ACM, 2011.
50. I. Uysal and W. B. Croft. User oriented tweet ranking: a filtering approach to microblogs. In 20th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management, pages 2261-2264. ACM, 2011.
51. W. M. Webberley. Inferring Interestingness in Online Social Networks. PhD thesis, Cardiff University, 2014.
52. R. W. White and S. T. Dumais. Characterizing and predicting search engine switching behavior. In 18th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management, pages 87-96. ACM, 2009.
53. M.-C. Yang, J.-T. Lee, S.-W. Lee, and H.-C. Rim. Finding interesting posts in twitter based on retweet graph analysis. In 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 1073-1074. ACM, 2012.
54. M.-C. Yang and H.-C. Rim. Identifying interesting twitter contents using topical analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(9):4330-4336, 2014.