International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 11 number 3 May 2014

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page122

Semantic Search Log for Social Personalized
Search
Stency. V. S M.E.
#1
, Sureshkumar. R M.Tech.
#2

1
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Maharaja Prithvi Engineering College, Coimbatore, India
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Maharaja Prithvi Engineering College,
Coimbatore, India
Abstract- Personalization of web-based information
systems based on specialized user models has become
more important in order to preserve the effectiveness of
their use as the amount of available content increases.
In this system, we are proposing a novel technique
called as Semantic Search log for Social Personalized
Search. This novel technique is used to provide results
for search query that relates to a particular users
background, his area of interests, his likes and dislikes,
the data he/she might have found to be useful for him
while searching. In our system, supervised learning
method is used for learning purpose. It is learn about
the user based upon his interactions inside the system.
User can give their basic information in their profile
and get benefits from their each and every search.
Inorder to obtain the semantics of videos; video
extraction based on the fuzzy-ontology and rule based
model is used in this project. When the user searches a
keyword using the search engine inside the social
network, according to the ontological profile of the user
and displays the personalized search results. Our
system can able to intelligently identify whether a
search result has been useful to him or not and save it
for his future reference when he searches for the same
or similar keyword next time. From the experimental
result, we obtain our system has high efficiency
compared to other personalized search engine.
Keywords- Social personalized search, Semantic search,
Ontology search engine, Semantic content extraction,
and video content modeling
I. INTRODUCTION
Growing end user expectations and requirements as
well as commercial considerations drive the demand
for ever improving state-of-the-art solutions in (web)
application development. According to this, various
contemporary initiatives pursue the advancements in
their respective fields of interest with the ultimate
goal of improving end user computing experience:
Adaptive Web focuses on personalized services
tailored to the specific needs of individual users (i.e.,
the user context, composed of user characteristics,
device and environment properties, etc.) according to
the content recommendation, navigation adaptation
and presentation customization. It is a response to the
one-size-fits-all approach which became
increasingly unsuitable as the amount of available
information, its difficulty and the diversity of its
consumers increased. Consequently, the Adaptive
Web addresses issues such as information overload,
the lost in hyperspace syndrome as well as
usability problems and performance aspects [1], [2].
Semantic Web as envisioned by Tim Berners-Lee
aims at improving upon the existing Web by adding a
semantic layer of metadata (i.e., meaning), which
would allow for advanced machine processing of
information and thus ultimately improving
application interoperability, data integration, sharing
and availability. This is proficient by using
ontologies (e.g., in RDF/RDFS or OWL), which
describe concepts and their relations with defined
semantics using unique identifiers URIs, for data
representation and reasoning [3].
If we took a look at the structure of the web, it's
collected of an enormous amount of documents and
links between them. On the other hand, current web
documents present human readable contents targeted
at humans. Yet, the web is not used only by humans,
as software agents are becoming users of the web too.
This has led to the development of the semantic web
[4],[5]. Information retrieval technology can draw
massive benefits from using semantic web vision. As
a standard retrieval system which is usually regard
query terms, as queries must match with keywords
used in the metadata. However, these systems dont
take into consideration the semantic relationships
between query terms and other concepts that might
be significant to user. That required the augmentation
of semantic web vision into traditional retrieval
systems resulting in the notion of semantic search. As
search is seen as a key applications that can benefit
from semantic web vision to provide improvements
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 11 number 3 May 2014
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page123
to recall and precision over traditional information
retrieval (IR) techniques.
Traditional keyword-based search as it offers high
recall but low precision, causing user to face too
many irrelevant results. This is caused by the deal
with documents as a set of words disregarding web
semantics as no semantic analysis is performed.
Semantic search offers enhancement to traditional
search as it allows for retrieval that incorporates the
underlying terms semantics [6], [7]. Whereas, users
usually don't articulate well the terms they want to
search providing only one or two terms for each
search engine. In this framework, using ontologies to
represent relationships between concepts can improve
search results [8], [9], [10]. That's why finding and
ranking ontologies on the semantic web has been put
forward as one of the motivations of the Semantic
web vision and has been subject to many researches
[11], [12], [13]. Found ontologies can be used to
enhance search process either statically or
dynamically [14]. Thereupon, researchers sake after
developing a full featured semantic search engine.
Swoogle was the first developed semantic search
engine. Swoogle utilizes the crawlers to discover
RDF documents and HTML documents with
embedded RDF content. Swoogle make use of these
RDF triples to record meaningful metadata about
them in its database [15], [16]. However, the birth of
other markup languages such as RDFs, OWL,etc
and being widely used [17] made it mandatory to
develop search engines that can deal with these
languages. However, according to the analysis of the
current Semantic Web Search and ranking techniques
we found that each of them has some limitations and
missing components. And due to the fact, information
retrieval system can be personalized using profiles.
After extensive study of the above mentioned
systems' defects and limitation, we proposed
Semantic Search log for Social Personalized Search
engine.
II. RELATED WORKS
Personalized systems are being developed to help
users find relevant information. The main challenge
of effective personalization systems is to accurately
identify the user search interests, and re order the
returned web pages in such a way that meets these
interests. Most personalized techniques model the
users preferences in the form of a user profile or
personal profile. In [18] the user has to explicitly
select the categories that best fit her interests from the
ODP and the user profile is then defined by storing
the whole path of each category of interest. When a
new query is issued Search results are classified
according to the ODP, and then the distance between
the hierarchical structure of the user profile and the
results topics is calculated to re rank results. Lack of
this method is that it does not maintain the users
changing preferences.
Another personalization method is presented in [19]
that defined the user profile as a long term model to
be a part of the Google Directory that stored topics of
visited pages with the number of visits for each.
Additional short term model is defined to store users
recently visited page-history with an adaptation
strategy to update the user profile. Re-rank is done by
measuring the hierarchical similarity between topics
in the user profile and topics of current search results.
One disadvantage of this approach is that not all web
pages are classified under Google Directory.
An ontological user profile approach is presented in
[20] which learned the user preferences after a period
of one month then extracted information from users
search history and matched it to concepts of the
predefined ontology (ODP). For a users new search,
Query ontology is defined from WordNet by
expanding query meaning into semantic hierarchy
which is then matched with the user profile to re rank
results. However, they do not consider that users
interests over time may get degraded in certain topics
and improved in others.
Another ontological user profile is defined in [21],
[22] based on the ODP. Each category in the profile
contains a vector of weighted terms from web pages
originally indexed under such category. Clicked
results are classified using the vector space model
(VSM) and interest scores for each category which
are used for the re-rank process are maintained based
on the users ongoing behavior. This approach does
not consider the likeness of the meaning when
classifying web pages.
The user model in [23] is defined by an acyclic tree
of nodes as concepts from the WordNet ontology.
Each node has a vector of weighted terms considered
as synonyms and are extracted from a users past
queries. A time stamp is associated with each concept
to define its last appearance in users query to
dynamically adapt the profiles. However, this
approach is deficient when a user submits query
words that are not present in dictionary or ontology
used by the system.

International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 11 number 3 May 2014
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page124
A. Types of Semantic search engine
In recent times, several semantic search engines are
developed and implemented in different working
environments, and these mechanisms can be put into
use to realize present search engines.
1) Alcides Calsavara and Glauco Schmidt propose
and define a novel kind of service for the semantic
search engine. Semantic search engines may
seriously contribute to the development of electronic
business applications since it is based on strong
theory and widely accepted standards [24].
2) Cohen Jonathan Mamou et al presented a semantic
search engine for XML (XSEarch) [25]. This new
search engine has a simple query language, suitable
for a new user. It returns semantically related
document fragments that satisfy the users query.
Advanced indexing techniques were developed to
facilitate efficient implementation of XSEarch.
3) Bhagwat and Polyzotis propose a Semantic-based
file system search engine- Eureka, which uses an
inference model to build the links between files and a
File Rank metric to rank the files according to their
semantic importance [26]. Eureka has two main
parts: a) crawler b) information retrieval based
metrics and File Rank metrics.
4) Wang et al. project a semantic search methodology
to retrieve information from normal tables, which has
three main steps: identifying semantic relationships
between table cells; converting tables into data in the
form of database; retrieving objective data by query
languages [27].
5) Kandogan et al. develop a semantic search engine-
Avatar, which combines the traditional text search
engine with use of ontology annotations [28]. Avatar
has two main functions: a) extraction and
representation b) interpretation.
III. PROPOSED METHODOLOGY
In our proposed system, we present a novel approach
called Semantic Search log for Social Personalized
Search technique. Every user has a distinct
background and a specific goal when searching for
information on the Web. The main goal of our
proposed system is produce the Web search
personalization is to tailor search results to a
particular user based on that users interests and
preferences. Effective personalization of information
access involves two important challenges: accurately
identifying the user context, and organizing the
information in such a way that matches the particular
context. We present an approach to personalized
search that involves modeling the user profile as
ontological profiles. Web personalization alleviates
the burden of information overload by tailoring the
information presented based on an individual users
needs. Every user has a specific goal when searching
for information through entering keyword queries
into a search engine. Keyword queries are inherently
ambiguous but often formulated while the user is
engaged in some larger task. The following sections
are performed in this system.
A. User profile creation
This is the initial module of this project. Here the
user can create their account in order to register their
details into semantic logs. While creating the account
user should provide their security information and
they can create their own username and password. A
Social network is implemented here for the user
sharing purpose in alone with user can create their
friends group. This user profile creation will be done
automatic admin authentication. User Creation
module includes the user profile creation, registration
and signup functionalities in the application. In this
section module, user gives the details about him such
as name, age, address, phone number, etc. By using
these informations the ontology profile is created
according this information.
Ontology is an explicit specification of concepts and
relationships that can exist between them. One
increasingly popular method to mediate information
access is through the use of ontologies. Researchers
have attempted to utilize ontologies for improving
navigation effectiveness as well as personalized Web
search and browsing, specifically when combined
with the notion of automatically generating
semantically enriched ontology-based user profiles.
B. Proflic Search Engine Optimization
Before optimization process, the updation of the
profile ontology is performed. The Ontology Search
Engine updates module is involving with admin
process where the data center is available with huge
number of data sets according to the user define
search. An Ontology table structure is created in
order to update the data which will be retrieved
according to the user define search. A site will be
updates in the data set with the prior http link, Data
content and hit ratio.
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 11 number 3 May 2014
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page125
The Proflic Search Engine Optimization is an
advanced search engine technique, which will be get
optimize according to the user internal search.
Basically a search engine will search according to the
Meta data as well as according to the hit ratio. Here
the database is designed according to the user define
search logs to that retervial will not be more
complex. Our goal is to utilize the user context to
personalize search results by re-ranking the results
returned from a search engine for a given query. We
re-rank the search results based on the interest scores
and the semantic evidence in the user profile. Once
the best matching concept is identified, a rank score
is assigned to the document by multiplying the
interest score for the concept, the similarity of the
document to the query, and the similarity of the
specific concept to the query.
C. Semantic Content Extraction
Automatic Semantic Content Extraction Framework
for videos is implemented for bridging the gap
between low-level representative features and high-
level semantic content in terms of object, event,
concept, spatial and temporal relation extraction.
There are two main steps followed in the automatic
semantic content extraction process. The first step is
to extract and classify object instances from
representative frames of shots of the video instances.
The second step is to extract events and concepts by
using domain ontology and rule definitions. A set of
procedures is executed to extract semantically
meaningful components in the automatic event and
concept extraction process. The first semantically
meaningful components are spatial relation instances
between object instances. Then, the temporal
relations are extracted by using changes in spatial
relations. Lastly, events and concepts are extracted by
using the spatial and temporal relations.
D. Semantic search process
After extraction of features from the videos, semantic
similarity between the query which is submitted by
user and these features is calculated. For the
semantic similarity we are used the WordNet.
WordNet is tool to measure the semantic similarity
between the query and semantic content of the
videos. When a user given the words taken as input it
finds the similarity to terms with the connections
among four types of Parts of Speech (POS) - noun,
verb, adjective, and adverb. The minimum unit in a
WordNet is synset, which represent an exact meaning
of a word. It includes the word, its clarification, and
its synonyms. The specific connotation of one word
under one type of POS is called a sense. Each sense
of a word is in a dissimilar synset. Synsets are
corresponding to senses =structures contain sets of
terms with identical meanings. Each synset has a
gloss that defines the concept it represents. Synsets
are connected to one another through explicit
semantic relations with query terms. Some of these
relationships (hypernym, hyponym for nouns, and
hypernym and troponym for verbs) comprise is-a-
kind-of (holonymy) and is-a-part-of hierarchies.
By using this semantic similarity, the semantic search
results are ranked. In other words, we are ranking the
semantic search result according to the semantic
similarity values. Finally we are obtaining the re-
ranked semantic search result based on the profile
ontology as well as semantic similarity between the
query which is given by user and video content
features.
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULT
We analyze and compare the performance offered by
existing system and proposed semantic search log.
The performance is evaluated by the parameters such
as precision and recall. Based on the comparison and
the results from the experiment show the proposed
approach works better than the existing system.
A. Precision
Precision value is calculated is based on the retrieval
of information at true positive prediction, false
positive .In healthcare data precision is calculated the
percentage of positive results returned that are
relevant.
Precision =
Truc posItIvc
Truc posItIvc+FaIsc posItIvc

B. Recall
Recall value is calculated is based on the retrieval of
information at true positive prediction, false negative.
In healthcare data precision is calculated the
percentage of positive results returned that are Recall
in this context is also referred to as the True Positive
Rate. Recall is the fraction of relevant instances that
are retrieved,
Recall =
Truc posItIvc
Truc posItIvc+FaIsc ncgatIvc

International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 11 number 3 May 2014
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page126

Fig 1. Precision/Recall rate comparison
In this section, we compare the precision and recall
parameter between existing system and proposed
semantic search log. These measures are
mathematically calculated by using above formula.
This graph shows the precision and recall rate of
existing system and proposed semantic search log
based on two parameters of precision/recall rate and
methods such as existing and proposed system. In
this graph X-axis will be methods such as existing
and proposed system and Y-axis will be
precision/recall rate. From the graph we can see that,
precision & recall of the system is reduced somewhat
in existing system than the proposed system. From
this graph we can say that the precision & recall rate
of proposed system is increased which will be the
best one. From view of this precision & recall
comparison graph we obtain conclude as the
proposed system has more effective in precision &
recall performance compare to other system.
V. CONCLUSION
Personalized web search is able to satisfy individuals
information needs by modeling long-term and short-
term user interests based on user sarching behaviours,
browsed documents or past queries and incorporate
these in the search process. In this paper, we propose
a Semantic Search log for Social Personalized Search
approach which models the user search preferences in
an ontological user profile. Our system is carried out
initially the search will be done according to the
profile information of the user, an ontology interface
process is implemented here in order to get the
relevance feedback information from the user define
output. Our goal is to utilize the user context to
personalize search results by re-ranking the results
returned from a search engine for a given query. Our
experiments show that Semantic Search log for
Social Personalized Search approach of the updated
user profile efficiently satisfies user information
needs with the most relevant results being brought on
to the top of the returned results.
REFERENCES
[1] Brusilovsky, P.: Adaptive Hypermedia. User Model. User-
Adapt. Interact., Vol. 11, 2001, No. 12, pp. 87110.
[2] Brusilovsky, P.Kobsa, A.Nejdl, W. Eds.: The Adaptive
Web, Methods and Strategies of Web Personalization. LNCS 4321,
Springer 2007.
[3] Shadbolt, N.Berners-Lee, T.Hall, W.: The Semantic Web
Revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Vol. 21, 2006, No. 3, pp. 96
101.
[4] N. R. Shadbolt, W. Hall, and T. Berners-Lee, The semantic
web: Revisited, IEEE-Intelligent Systems, vol. 21, issue 3, pp.
96101, May 2006.
[5] T. Burners-Lee, J . Hendler, and O. Lassila, The semantic
web, Scientific American, vol. 284(5), May 2001.
[6] R. Guha, R. McCool, and E. Miller. "Semantic Search". In
Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide
Web, pages 700709, 2003.
[7] T.Finin, J .Mayfield, C.Fink, A.J oshi, and R.S. Cost,
Information retrieval and the semantic web, in Proceeding of the
38th International Conference on SystemSciences, Hawaii, USA,
2005.
[8] E. Mkel. "Survey of semantic search research". In:
Proceedings of the Seminar on Knowledge Management on the
Semantic Web, Department of Computer Science, University of
Helsinki (2005)
[9] Ramprakash, S. K. Malik, N. Prakash, S. Rizvi , "A
Comparative Study of Different Types of Search Engines in
Context of Semantic Web, National Conference on
Advancements in Information & Communication Technology
(NCAICT) , on March 15-16, 2008.
[10] W.A. PINHEIRO, A. Maria , C. Moura. "Semantic Search in
Portals using Ontologies". I Workshop de Web Semntica
(WWS2004), Braslia, 22 de outubro de 2004
[11] C.Patel, K.Supekar, YLee, and E.Park, Ontokhoj: A semantic
web portal for ontology searching ,ranking and classification ,in
Proc.of ACM 5th International Workshop on Web Information and
Data Management (WIDM),New Orleans, pp.58-61,2003.
[12] E. Thomas, J . Z. Pan, D. H. Sleeman. "ONTOSEARCH2:
Searching Ontologies Semantically". In Proc. of OWL Experiences
and Directions Workshop, 2007.
[13] H. Alani, N. Noy, N. Shah, N. Shadbolt, M. Musen
"Searching Ontologies Based on Content: Experiments in the
Biomedical Domain In: 4th International Conference on
Knowledge Capture.ACM Press; p.5562, 2007.
[14] D. Taibi, M. Gentile, L. Seta. "A semantic search engine for
learning resources". Third International Conference on Multimedia
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 11 number 3 May 2014
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page127
and Information & Communication Technologies in
Education.2005.
[15] L. Ding, T. Finin, A. J oshi, R. Pan, R. S. Cost, Y. Peng, P.
Reddivari, V. C. Doshi, and J . Sachs. "Swoogle: A semantic web
search and metadata engine for the semantic web". In Proc. 13th
ACM Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management, Nov.
2004.
[16] T. Finin et al., "Swoogle: Searching for knowledge on the
Semantic Web", In proceedings of the Twentieth National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 05) 2005.
[17] S. Decker, S. Melnik, F. van Harmelen, D. Fensel, M. Klein,
J . Broekstra, M. Erdmann, I. Horrocks. "The Semantic Web: the
roles of XML and RDF". Internet Computing, IEEE Vol 4, Issue 5
P: 63-73, 1089-7801. 2002.
[18] Chirita, P. Nejdl, W. Paiu, R. and Kohlschutter, C. (2005)
Using ODP Metadata to Personalize Search. Proc. SIGIR 05,
Salvador, Brazil, 15-19 August, pp. 178-185, ACM Press, New
York, NY, USA.
[19] Li, L.Yang, Z. Wang, B. and Kitsuregawa, M. (2007)
Dynamic Adaptation Strategies for Long- Termand Short-Term
User Profile to Personalize Search. Proc. Joint Asia-Pacific Web
Conf. / Web-Age Information Management Conf., Huang Shan,
China, 16-18 J une, pp. 228-240, Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, Vol. 4505, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
[20] Mohammed, N. Duong, T. and J o, G. (2010) Contextual
Information Search Based on Ontological User Profile. Proc. of
Computational Collective Intelligence Conf., Kaohsiung, Taiwan,
10-12 November, pp. 490-500, Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, Vol. 6422, Springer-Verlag, Berlin
[21] Sieg, A. Mobasher, B., and Burke, R. (2007) Learning
Ontology-Based User Profiles: A Semantic Approach to
Personalized Web Search. IEEE Intelligent Informatics Bulletin, 8,
7- 18.
[22] Sieg, A. Mobasher, B., and Burke, R. (2007) Web search
personalization with ontological user profiles. Proc. 16
th
ACM
Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management, Lisboa,
Portugal, 6-10 November, pp. 525534, ACM Press, New York,
NY, USA.
[23] Mianowska, B. and Nguyen, N.(2011) A Method for User
Profile Adaptation in Document Retrieval. Proc. 3
rd
Asian
Conference on Intelligent Information and Database Systems,
Daegu, Korea, 20-22 April, pp. 181192, Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, Vol. 6592 Springer-Verlag, Berlin
[24] F. F. Ramos, H. Unger, V. Larios (Eds.): LNCS 3061, pp.
145157, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004.
[25] Cohen, S. Mamou, J . Kanza, Y. Sagiv, Y XSEarch: A
Semantic Search Engine for XML proceedings of the
international conference on very large databases, pages 45-56,
2003.
[26] D. Bhagwat and N. Polyzotis, "Searching a file systemusing
inferred semantic links," in Proceedings of HYPERTEXT '05
Salzburg, 2005, pp. 85-87.
[27] H. L. Wang, S. H. Wu, I. C. Wang, C. L. Sung, W. L. Hsu,
and W. K. Shih, "Semantic search on Internet tabular information
extraction for answering queries," in Proceedings of CIKM '00
McLean, 2000, pp.243-249.
[28] E. Kandogan, R. Krishnamurthy, S. Raghavan, S.
Vaithyanathan, and H. Zhu, "Avatar semantic search: a database
approach to information retrieval," in Proceedings of SIGMOD '06
Chicago, 2006, pp. 790-792.