Semantic Query Routing in Unstructured Networks Using Social Metaphors

  • Christoph Tempich
  • Steffen Staab

Summary

In Peer-to-Peer networks, finding the appropriate answer for an information request, such as the answer to a query for RDF(S) data, depends on selecting the right peer in the network. We here investigate how social metaphors can be exploited effectively and efficiently to solve this task. To this end, we define a method for query routing, REMINDIN’, that lets (i) peers observe which queries are successfully answered by other peers, (ii) memorizes this observation, and, (iii) subsequently uses this information in order to select peers to forward requests to.

REMINDIN’ has been implemented for the SWAP Peer-to-Peer platform as well as for a simulation environment. We have used the simulation environment in order to investigate how successful variations of REMINDIN’ are and how they compare to baseline strategies in terms of number of messages forwarded in the network and statements appropriately retrieved.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Karl Aberer, Philippe Cudré-Mauroux, Anwitaman Datta, Zoran Despotovic, Manfred Hauswirth, Magdalena Punceva, and Roman Schmidt. P-Grid: a self-organizing structured p2p system. ACM SIGMOD Record, 32(3):29–33, 2003.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Lada A. Adamic, Rajan M. Lukose, Amit R. Puniyani, and Bernardo A. Huberman. Search in power-law networks. Physical Review E, 64(46135), 2001.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    David W. Aha, editor. Lazy Learning. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1997.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Wolf-Tilo Balke, Wolfgang Nejdl, Wolf Siberski, and Uwe Thaden. Progressive distributed top-k retrieval in Peer-to-Peer networks. In 21st International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), Tokyo, Japan, 2005.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Brian Cooper. Guiding queries to information sources with infobeacons. In ACM/IFIP/USENIX 5th International Middleware Conference, Toronto, 2004.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Crespo and H. Garcia-Molina. Routing indices for Peer-to-Peer systems. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 23–32. IEEE Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Arturo Crespo and Hector Garcia-Molina. Semantic Overlay Networks for P2P Systems. Submitted for publication http://www-db.stanford.edu/~crespo/publications/op2p.pdf, 2002.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Ehrig et al. Towards evaluation of Peer-to-Peer-based distributed knowledge management systems. In Ludger van Elst, Virginia Dignum, and Andreas Abecker, editors, “Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management International Symposium AMKM 2003” Stanford, CA, USA, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (LNAI) 2926, pages 73–88. Springer, Berlin, 2003.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    G. W. Flake, S. Lawrence, C. L. Giles, and F. M. Coetzee. Self-organization and identification of web communities. IEEE Computer, 35(3):66–70, March 2002.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. Guha and R. McCool. TAP: a Semantic Web platform. Computer Networks, 42(5):557–577, August 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. Löser et al. Efficient data store discovery in a scientific P2P network. In N. Ashish and C. Goble, editors, Proc. of the WS on Semantic Web Technologies for Searching and Retrieving Scientific Data, CEUR WS 83, 2003. Colocated with the 2. ISWC-03 http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen. de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-83/.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Stanlay Milgram. The small world problem. Psychology Today, 67(1), 1967.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    W. Nejdl et al. EDUTELLA: A P2P networking infrastructure based on RDF. In Proc. of the 2002 WWW Conference, pages 604–615, Hawaii, USA, May 2002.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    W. Nejdl et al. Super-peer-based routing and clustering strategies for rdf-based Peer-to-Peer networks. In Proc. of the 12th World Wide Web Conference, Budapest, Hungary, 20–24 May 2003. ACM.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Andy Oram, editor. Peer-to-Peer. Harnessing the Power of Disruptive Technologies. O’Reilly, 2001.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Dennis Quan, David Huynh, and David R. Karger. Haystack: A platform for authoring end user semantic web applications. In The Semantic Web — ISWC 2003, LNCS 2870, pages 738–753, Heidelberg, 2003. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    A. Rowstron and P. Druschel. Pastry: Scalable, distributed object location and routing for large-scale Peer-to-Peer systems. In Proc. of the Int. Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms (Middleware), pages 329–350, 2001.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    M. Schlosser et al. A scalable and ontology-based P2P infrastructure for Semantic Web Services. In P2P-2002 — Proceedings of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Peer-to-Peer Computing, pages 104–111. IEEE Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Kunwadee Sripanidkulchai, Bruc Maggs, and Hui Zhang. Efficient content location using interest based locality in Peer-to-Peer system. In Infocom. IEEE, 2003.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    S. Staab, F. Heylighen, C. Gershenson, G. W. Flake, D. M. Pennock, D. C. Fain, D. De Roure, K. Aberer, W.-M. Shen, O. Dousse, and P. Thiran. Neurons, viscose fluids, freshwater polyp hydra-and self-organizing information systems. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 18(4):72–86, July–Aug. 2003.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    I. Stoica et al. Chord: A scalable Peer-To-Peer lookup service for internet applications. In Proc. of the 2001 ACM SIGCOMM Conference, pages 149–160, 2001.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    C. Tempich, S. Staab, and A. Wranik. REMINDIN’: Semantic query routing in Peer-to-Peer networks based on social metaphors. In Proc. of the 13th World Wide Web Conference, New York, USA, May 17–22 2004. ACM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Tempich
    • 1
  • Steffen Staab
    • 2
  1. 1.AIFBUniversity of KarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.ISWebUniversity of Koblenz-LandauKoblenzGermany

Personalised recommendations