MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767188022 · doi:10.14257/ijhit.2017.10.8.04

Research on Application of Lucene Search Engine in Social Network Platform

2017· article· en· W2767188022 on OpenAlexaff
Mei Yu, Wentao Xing, Jian Yu, Jie Gao, Shengguang Ma, Tenghai Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Hybrid Information Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb visibility and informetrics
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSearch engineComputer scienceInformation retrievalSocial network (sociolinguistics)World Wide WebSocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of Web2.0 technology, social networks begin to play an increasingly important role in people's life.Widely used social network for researchers has brought some potentially useful information, such as the user's interests and preferences.At the same time, constant search results provided by the search engine can not meet the individual needs of users, a new way search engine, personalized search is an urgent need to explore.Based on this demand, the paper from Sina microblog mining user interests, and the use of open-source Lucene search engine completes personalized search.In this paper, the structure and principle of Lucene search engine are summarized and some related knowledge are introduced, such as text preprocessing and vector space model.Then, this article proposes the Lucene TagMatch Ranking (LTR) algorithm.The main idea is using user's Sina microblog texts to extract tags of interest and measure the matching degree between web pages and user's interests which named value of tag matching degree by the vector space model, then combine the traditional Lucene scoring mechanism, finally realize personalized ranking results based on the user's interest.At last the Eclipse programming algorithm based on Java is used to carry out comparison experiment to confirm the effectiveness of the algorithm.The results are presented to the user in the ranking which based on the user's interests, it will be able to reach recommendation algorithm based on user's interests.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Hybrid Information TechnologySame topicWeb visibility and informetricsFrench-language works237,207