arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 1309.5503

Evaluating Sliding and Sticky Target Policies by Measuring Temporal Drift in Acyclic Walks Through a Web Archive

Abstract

When a user views an archived page using the archive's user interface (UI), the user selects a datetime to view from a list. The archived web page, if available, is then displayed. From this display, the web archive UI attempts to simulate the web browsing experience by smoothly transitioning between archived pages. During this process, the target datetime changes with each link followed; drifting away from the datetime originally selected. When browsing sparsely-archived pages, this nearly-silent drift can be many years in just a few clicks. We conducted 200,000 acyclic walks of archived pages, following up to 50 links per walk, comparing the results of two target datetime policies. The Sliding Target policy allows the target datetime to change as it does in archive UIs such as the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. The Sticky Target policy, represented by the Memento API, keeps the target datetime the same throughout the walk. We found that the Sliding Target policy drift increases with the number of walk steps, number of domains visited, and choice (number of links available). However, the Sticky Target policy controls temporal drift, holding it to less than 30 days on average regardless of walk length or number of domains visited. The Sticky Target policy shows some increase as choice increases, but this may be caused by other factors. We conclude that based on walk length, the Sticky Target policy generally produces at least 30 days less drift than the Sliding Target policy.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Scott G. Ainsworth, Michael L. Nelson. 2013-09-21. Evaluating Sliding and Sticky Target Policies by Measuring Temporal Drift in Acyclic Walks Through a Web Archive. https://doi.org/10.1145/2467696.2467718

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

On some unresolved issues in aggregate level comparative research evaluation

This short conceptual paper recalls to the attention of the scientometrics community some long-standing open methodological problems and proposes new directions that might be taken in renewed engagements with them. These problems are the differential dependency of the global reference score on the included units' observed scores and the dilution of impact measurement accuracy due to collaboration, which causes a global convergence in country citation impact due to international collaborative research. Advantages and disadvantages of existing and new solutions are discussed.

cs.DL↗

Multiplex coupling: Connecting the intellectual base and the topics of a research field

Two documents can be close because they cite the same works or because they write about the same things, and the two kinds of proximity often disagree. Science mapping reads them in separate maps or merges them, as hybrid clustering does; either way the disagreement is lost. We introduce multiplex coupling, a framework that couples the same documents by their references and by their terms, keeps the two layers separate and analyses their relation. Similarities are standardised against a null model, and the agreement between the layers is measured on random pairs of documents. Consensus clustering partitions each layer into roots, groups sharing an intellectual base, and themes, groups sharing a topic. A test on the roots $\times$ themes table identifies branching roots and convergent themes, and pairs of roots are followed over time. Every structure is reported with its persistence across numbers of neighbours, which on synthetic data identifies most false branching. Applications to Web of Science, Scopus and OpenAlex collections show that the two layers carry largely complementary information, and reveal substantive and methodological bases that have grown into several topics. The framework is implemented in bibliometrix.

cs.DL↗

Faster alone vs. further together: The speed and impact of researchers' responses to societal crises

Throughout the 21st century, society encountered numerous crises that demanded quick and widespread action. In the present work, we documented researchers' responses to 25 of these crises, analyzing 1,537,284 published responses from 3,262,152 researchers spanning 225 countries and territories. An analysis of publication speed and citation patterns yielded support for a proverbial claim: "to go fast, go alone; to go far, go together". Solo authors were quicker to publish responses to societal crises -- but their responses received less attention in scholarly, news, and policy venues. Growth towards large-scale collaboration was associated with increased impact; However, this team size advantage was characterized by diminishing returns and significantly varied across sampled crises. Furthermore, pluralistic machine learning modeling highlights the importance of considering additional context, such as government effectiveness and the expertise of team leaders. Taken together, results facilitate evidence-based conversations regarding how researchers optimize speed and impact in the midst of societal crises.

cs.DL↗