1 / 22

AlvisP2P : Scalable Peer-to-Peer Text Retrieval in a Structured P2P Network

AlvisP2P : Scalable Peer-to-Peer Text Retrieval in a Structured P2P Network. Toan Luu , Gleb Skobeltsyn , Fabius Klemm , Maroje Puh , Ivana Podnar Zarko , Martin Rajman , Karl Aberer VLDB_2008. Outlines. Introduction Distributed indexing/retrieval AlvisP2P architecture

tilly
Download Presentation

AlvisP2P : Scalable Peer-to-Peer Text Retrieval in a Structured P2P Network

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AlvisP2P : Scalable Peer-to-Peer Text Retrieval in a Structured P2P Network ToanLuu, GlebSkobeltsyn, FabiusKlemm, MarojePuh, IvanaPodnarZarko, Martin Rajman, Karl Aberer VLDB_2008

  2. Outlines • Introduction • Distributed indexing/retrieval • AlvisP2P architecture • AlvisP2P software • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • The AlvisP2P IR engine enables efficient retrieval with multi-keyword queries from a global document collection available in a P2P network. • Uses an optimized overlay network. • A novel indexing/retrieval mechanisms. • Ensurelow bandwidth consumption. • Enabling unlimitednetwork growth.

  4. Cont. • Two important properties: • the generated distributed index stores posting lists for carefully chosen indexing term combinations (hereafter called keys), and • the posting lists containing too many document references are truncated to a bounded number of their top-ranked elements.

  5. Cont. • Guaranteeing acceptable storage and bandwidth requirements, essentially because the number of indexing term combinations remains scalable and the transmitted posting lists never exceed a constant size.

  6. Cont. • Two key generation techniques : • Highly Discriminative Keys (HDK) • Query-Driven Indexing (QDI) • Overcoming the scalability problem of single-term retrieval in structured P2P networks, while preserving a retrieval quality fully.

  7. Distributed indexing/retrieval • Each peer is responsible for: • the generation of index entries to be stored in the global distributed index for its local documents, and • the storage and maintenance of the fraction of the global index associated with the keys that have been assigned to the peer by the hashing mechanism used in the underlying DHT.

  8. Cont. • HDK approach : • Generates new keys during the indexing phase based on observed document frequencies: • Each time a posting list for some key k exceeds a predefined size, new indexing keys with more terms are generated. • QDI approach : • Using decentralized monitoring of query statistics to detect and index new popular keys, as well as to remove obsolete keys from the index.

  9. Cont. Steps : • A peer receives a new query. • To explore the lattice of query term combinations(query lattice). • The querying peer requests the posting list associated with the term combination from the peer responsible for it.

  10. Cont. • If the term combination is indeed present in the global index, the requested posting list is sent back to the querying peer. • If this list is not truncated, the part of the query lattice dominated by the term combination is excluded from further lattice exploration.

  11. Cont. • Additional approximations can be made to improve load balancing with an only marginal loss in retrieval precision.

  12. Cont. • During the exploration, each contacted peer also updates the usage statistics for the requested term combination. • The querying peer produces their union, ranks all the documents w.r.t the original query, and presents the top-ranked results to the user.

  13. Cont. • On-demand indexing mechanism. • The peer responsible for this key acquires a new posting list containing a bounded number of top-ranked document references. • The key is then considered as indexed and can thus be used for subsequent query processing.

  14. Cont. • Obsolete keys can be removed. • Resulting in an efficient indexing structure adaptive to the current query popularity distribution. • Increasing the overall retrieval quality.

  15. AlvisP2P architecture

  16. Cont. • The components in higher layers exclusively rely on the functionalities provided by lower layers. • Layers 1 and 2 implement the peer-to-peer overlay infrastructure. • Layer 2 consists of a Distributed Hash Table (DHT) that is able to sustain high traffic loads.

  17. Cont. • Layer 3 implements one of the aforementioned techniques. • Layer 4 is responsible for ranking. • Rankingmodel • Global document frequencies, averagedocument length, term frequencies and other statisticalinformation.

  18. Cont. • Layer 5 implements a possibly sophisticated “local search engine”.

  19. AlvisP2P software • The user can use a Web browser to query the AlvisP2P network.

  20. Cont. • Figure 5 shows the client's “Search” tab with a query result.

  21. Cont. • The corresponding “Manager of shared documents” tab is displayed in Figure 6.

  22. Conclusion • We have presented the AlvisP2P prototype for scalable full-text P2P-IR that uses carefully selected indexing term combinations associated with possibly truncated posting lists. • The AlvisP2P can comparable to state-of-the-art centralized search engine.

More Related