Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 350–362 | Cite as

Distributed context aware collaborative filtering approach for P2P service selection and recovery in wireless mesh networks



With the evolution of large number of social networking sites in which various users share the information at various levels in Peer-to-Peer (P2P) manner, there is a need of efficient P2P collaborative mechanisms to achieve efficiency and accuracy at each level. To achieve high level of accuracy and scalability, a distributed collaborative filtering (CF) approach for P2P service selection and recovery is proposed in this paper. The proposed approach is different from the traditional centralized approaches as both user and network views are modelled and an estimation of the service recovery time is included if some of the services are failed during execution. A novel Context Aware P2P Service Selection and Recovery (CAPSSR) algorithm is proposed. To filter the relevant contents for user needs, a new Distributed Filtering Metric (DFM) is included in the algorithm which selects the contents based upon the user input. The performance of the proposed algorithm is evaluated with traditional centralized algorithm with respect to scalability and accuracy. The results obtained show that the proposed approach is better than the existing approaches in terms of accuracy and scalability.


Collaborative computing Service selection Wireless mesh networks Collaborative filtering Collaborative scheduling 


  1. 1.
    Liu Z, Qu W, Li H, Xie C (2010) A hybrid collaborative filtering recommendation mechanism for P2P networks. Futur Gener Comput Syst 26(8):1409–1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akyildiz F, Wang X, Wang W (2005) Wireless mesh networks: a survey. Comput Netw 47(4):445–487MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Juan R, SergioF O, Jose P, Roc M, Esunly M, Dolors R (2010) A communication infrastructure to ease the development of mobile collaborative applications. J Netw Comput Appl 34(6):1883–1893Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee W, Tseng S, Shieh W (2010) Collaborative real-time traffic information generation and sharing framework for the intelligent transportation system. Inform Sci 180:62–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Resnick P, Iacovou N, Suchak M, Bergstrom P, Riedl J (1994) GroupLens: an open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative WorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hao M, Irwin K, Lyu M (2007) Effective missing data prediction for collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 2007, 39–46Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Derry S, David W, Barry S (2003) Preserving recommender accuracy and diversity in sparse datasets. In: FLAIRS Conference 2003 139–143Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rong H, Yansheng L (2006) A hybrid user and item-based collaborative filtering with smoothing on sparse data. In proceeding of 16th International Conference on Artificial Reality and Tel existence. 2006, 184–189Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marc S, Pedro G (2010) eSciGrid: a P2P-based e-science Grid for scalable and efficient data sharing. Futur Gener Comput Syst 26(5):704–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang J, De Vries AP, Reinders MJT (2006) A user_item relevance model for log based collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the European Conference on IR Research. Springer, London, 2006, 37–48Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang J, De Vries AP, Reinders MJT (2006) Unifying user-based and item based collaborative filtering approaches by similarity fusion. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. ACM Press, New York, 2006, 501–508Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang J, De Vries AP, Reinders MJT (2008) Unified relevance models f or rating prediction in collaborative filtering. ACM Trans Inf Syst 26(3):1–42MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herlocker JL, Konstan JA, Riedl JT, Terveen LG (2004) Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Trans Inf Syst 22(1):5–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ryan PB, Bridge D (2006) Collaborative recommending using formal concept analysis. Knowl-Based Syst 19(5):309–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pu P, Chen L (2007) Trust-inspiring explanation interfaces for recommender systems. Knowl-Based Syst 20(6):542–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Giaglis GM, Lekakos G (2006) Improving the prediction accuracy of recommendation algorithms: approaches anchored on human factors. Interact Comput 18(3):410–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fuyuki I, Quan TK, Shinichi H (2006) Improving accuracy of recommender systems by clustering items based on stability of user similarity. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Agents, Web Technologies and Internet Commerce 2006Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Manolopoulus Y, Nanopoulus A, Papadopoulus AN, Symeonidis P (2007) Collaborative recommender systems: combining effectiveness and efficiency. Expert Syst Appl 34:2995–3013Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hernández F, Gaudioso E (2008) Evaluation of recommender systems: a new approach. Expert Syst Appl 35:790–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Su A, Yang S, Hwang Y, Zhang J (2010) A Web 2.0-based collaborative annotation system for enhancing knowledge sharing in collaborative learning environments. Comput Educ 55:752–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liaw SS, Chen GD, Huang HM (2008) Users’ attitudes toward Web-based collaborative learning systems for knowledge management. Comput Educ 50:950–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    WebTrends, /; 2009
  24. 24.
    Rafael D, Crescencio B, Manuel O (2011) A model-based framework to automate the analysis of users’ activity in collaborative systems. J Netw Comput Appl 34(4):1200–1209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Landsiedel O, Gotz S, Wehrle K (2006) Towards scalable mobility in distributed hash tables. Proc. IEEE Conf. on Peer-to-Peer Computing, 2006Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ratnasamy S, Karp B, Shenker S, Estrin D, Govindan R, Yin L, Yu F (2003) Data-centric storage in sensornets with GHT, a geographic hash table. Mob Netw Appl 8(4):427–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Desnoyers P, Ganesan D, Shenoy P (2005) TSAR: a two tier sensor storage architecture using interval skip graphs. Proc. ACM SenSys, Nov. 2005Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Galluccio L, Morabito G, Palazzo S, Pellegrini M, Renda ME (2007) Georoy: a location-aware enhancement to Viceroy peer-to- peer algorithm. Comput Netw 51(8):379–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Asaad Al, Gopalakrishnan S, Leung V (2009) Peer-to-peer file sharing over wireless mesh networks. In Proc. of Communications, Computers and Signal Processing, 2009, Victoria, BC, Canada, 23–26 Aug., 697–702Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Alasaad A, Gopalakrishnan S, Leung V (2011) Extending P2PMesh: topology-aware schemes for efficient peer-to-peer data sharing in wireless mesh networks Wireless Communication and Mobile Computing 2011Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Canali C, Renda ME, Santi P (2008) Evaluating load balancing in peer-to-peer resource sharing algorithms for wireless mesh networks Proc. IEEE MeshTech 603–609Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Canali C, Renda ME, Santi P (2010) Enabling peer-to-peer resource sharing in wireless mesh networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 9(3):333–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bobadilla J, Serradilla F, Bernal J (2010) A new collaborative filtering metric that improves the behaviour of recommender systems. Knowl-Based Syst 23(5):20–528Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Breese JS, Heckerman D, Kadie C (1998) Empirical analysis of predictive algorithms for collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 14th conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence 43–52, 1998Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chih-Ping W, Chin-Sheng Y, Han-Wei H (2008) A collaborative filtering based approach to personalized document clustering. Decis Support Syst 45(3):413–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Neeraj Kumar
    • 1
  • Naveen Chilamkurti
    • 2
  • Jong-Hyouk Lee
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringThapar UniversityPatialaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and Computer EngineeringLa Trobe UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.RSM DepartmentTELECOM BretagneCesson-SévignéFrance

Personalised recommendations