![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Return to Paper Session 4: Keyword Search, Peer-to-Peer Systems, and Web Current peer-to-peer (p2p) full-text keyword search techniques fall into the following categories: document-based partitioning, keyword-based partitioning, hybrid indexing, and semantic search. This paper provides a performance evaluation and comparison of these p2p full-text keyword search techniques on a dataset with 3.7 million web pages and 6.8 million search queries. Our evaluation results can serve as a guide for choosing the most suitable p2p full-text keyword search technique based on given system parame- ters, such as network size, the number of documents, and the number of queries per second. ![]() ©2006 Association for Computing Machinery |