Papers in PDF format

Our approach is based on automatic distribution and replication of meta-information (abstracts of resources).
By the “abstract” we mean a unit of meta-information, a small (within 1-2K) description of a resource. An
abstract has to contain at least two components: a short description of resource to judge on the relevance to a
query being processed and some pointer to the resource (such as URL or URN) to locate the resource at retrieval
stage. WHOIS++ templates and Harvest SOIF templates are examples of an abstract. Other information, such as
abstract’s expire date, its source, popularity rating, may be stored with the abstract.
Using the abstracts instead of full text documents makes it technologically feasible to pass, replicate, index and
search the resource discovery meta-information because it decreases index size and network traffic. It also
provides a uniform approach other types of resources, such as pictures and software packages.
To achieve aims of distributed indexing and query processing, we could deploy a network of index brokers and
allow abstracts to travel from index to index and stay longer where and while they are popular. The more
popular the abstract is, the faster and further it would travel and the more replicas would exist.
Observations and Assumptions
A number of observations led to this approach and which suggest that it can achieve its aims:
1. When one is looking for information, it is very likely that others have already looked for this information.
This is especially true in a specialised environment, where people are working in the same area and require
similar information. This observation is supported by the success of resource caching [O’Callaghan 95] and
mirroring. Also analysis of log files of search engines has shown that there are small number “hot” topics which
constitute a large part of the total number of queries.
2. In many cases, users would be satisfied with any information on the search subject because they can use this
information to find more links or references.
3. A large amount of published material on the Internet has a very low value, and there is a strong need for
expert selection, not for search returning anything matching query terms.
Because of these reasons, the News, for example, is successfully used as a resource discovery system, although
it was not designed for that purpose. In our experience, it is a good idea to try the news FAQs as the first point
when starting looking for material in a new area.
In What’sHot, we assume that we can obtain abstracts of resources from publishers, or derive abstracts
automatically from the resources, or get them from existing systems, like Harvest. We also assume that having
retrieved and reviewed a document, people are willing to give a “yes/no” feedback (vote) on the document value
and relevance to the query. This is not mandatory, however. We can judge on the value of resource based on the
number of users who retrieved it, but an explicit vote is a better criteria.
What What’sHot Looks Like For Users
There is no essential change in the current search process. Instead of contacting InfoSeek or Lycos, people
contact a (local, in most cases) What’sHot broker and receive a search form. After submitting a query, they
receive a result form similar to the one you would receive from a conventional search engine. What’sHot result
form, however, has a check box for each abstract. There is also a “Submit” button on the form. The users check
the check box only if they liked the resource. They press the “Submit” button to send the feedback to the broker.
A user may send their user profile (description of interests) to a broker and (possibly, for a small fee) from time
to time receive e-mail messages about newly available good resources that may be of interest.
We realise that there are users (possibly, many), who do not bother checking boxes and replying. The system
just ignores them. This means that the system does not cache information that is interesting to these people. In