A study of distinctiveness in web results of two search engines

WWW 2015 Companion - Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 267-273

  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; Web search

Indexed keywords

BINS; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; SEARCH ENGINES; WEBSITES;

BING; EMPIRICAL EVALUATIONS; ENGLISH LANGUAGES; EYE-TRACKING; GOOGLE; RESULT COMPARISON; WEB SEARCH RESULTS; WEB SEARCHES;

WORLD WIDE WEB;

EID: 84960876381     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2740908.2743060     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. 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.
2. B. W. Bader and T. G. Kolda. Matlab tensor toolbox version 2. 2. Albuquerque, NM, USA: Sandia National Laboratories, 2007.
3. J. Bar-Ilan. Search engine ability to cope with the changing web. In Web dynamics, pages 195-215. Springer, 2004.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. A. Broder. A taxonomy of web search. ACM Sigir forum, 36(2):3-10, 2002.
7. C. D. Brown and H. T. Davis. Receiver operating characteristics curves and related decision measures: A tutorial. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 80(1):24-38, 2006.
8. E. C. Chi and T. G. Kolda. On tensors, sparsity, and nonnegative factorizations. SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, 33(4):1272-1299, 2012.
9. H. Chu and M. Rosenthal. Search engines for the world wide web: A comparative study and evaluation methodology. In American Society for Information Science, volume 33, pages 127-135, 1996.
10. W. Ding and G. Marchionini. A comparative study of web search service performance. In ASIS Annual Meeting, volume 33, pages 136-42. ERIC, 1996.
11. E. Enge, S. Spencer, J. Stricchiola, and R. Fishkin. The art of SEO. O'Reilly, 2012.
12. Federal Communications Commission. Editorializing by broadcast licensees. Washington, DC: GPO, 1949.
13. S. Gauch and G. Wang. Information fusion with profusion. In 1st World Conference of the Web Society, 1996.
14. Z. Guan and E. Cutrell. An eye tracking study of the effect of target rank on web search. In SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 417-420. ACM, 2007.
15. A. Gulli and A. Signorini. The indexable web is more than 11. 5 billion pages. In 14th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 902-903. ACM, 2005.
16. 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.
17. R. A. Harshman. Foundations of the parafac procedure: models and conditions for an" explanatory" multimodal factor analysis. Technical report, UCLA, 1970.
18. T. G. Kolda and B. W. Bader. Tensor decompositions and applications. SIAM review, 51(3):455-500, 2009.
19. F. W. Lancaster and E. G. Fayen. Information Retrieval On-Line. Melville Publishing Co., 1973.
20. S. Lawrence and C. L. Giles. Searching the world wide web. Science, 280(5360):98-100, 1998.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. D. Lewandowski. Web search engine research. Emerald Group Publishing, 2012.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. A. Pirkola. The effectiveness of web search engines to index new sites from different countries. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 14(2), 2009.
27. K. Purcell, J. Brenner, and L. Rainie. Search engine use 2012. Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2012.
28. E. Selberg and O. Etzioni. Multi-service search and comparison using the metacrawler. In 4th international conference on World Wide Web, 1995.
29. 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.
30. A. Spink, B. J. Jansen, and C. Wang. Comparison of major web search engine overlap: 2005 and 2007. In 14th Australasian World Wide Web Conference, 2008.
31. N. J. Stroud and A. Muddiman. Exposure to news and diverse views in the internet age. ISJLP, 8:605, 2012.
32. D. Wilkinson and M. Thelwall. Search markets and search results: The case of Bing. Library & Information Science Research, 35(4):318-325, 2013.