2013 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, December 2 - 4, 2013, Sarawak, Malaysia
Interface Features of Semantic Web Search Engine Azilawati Azizan, Zainab Abu Bakar, Normaly Kamal Ismail, Mohd Firdaus Amran Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
[email protected],
[email protected] the diverse needs of users and the commercial objectives of the competing search engine[11]. Capabilities between these search engines are also different from each other. Generally, most search engines are strictly limited in its understanding of user intent [12]. It is only capable to process keyword-based search and the search result is a long list of links. So, the user needs to examine each link in order to find which page is relevant to their query. Such task is considered as exploratory search [13][2].
Abstract—Even many current search engines have put a lot of effort to improve the quality of their system, yet the user still facing difficulties in doing their search activity. The problem is actually related to an issue of how easy to use the application, which is referring to usability matter. Therefore, in this paper we made a brief survey on existing semantic search engine (SSE) with the focus to reveal the predominant and prevalent features used in the interface design. Eight SSE was selected and a list of all features used by current SSE is presented. The finding shows that most of SSE have a simple search box, clean and clear search screen, have image results and highlighted keyword in snippet view. In the discussion part, we also highlighted some of the significant features and design guidelines that comply with usability principles for designing SSE user interface. Keywords- Semantic Guidelines, Usability
I.
Search
Engine,
Interface
In semantic search engine, user query can be in natural language question or a complex query, and the search result is either a summary of the answer or meaningful excerpt of links. So in this context, we can see that SSE has a bigger responsibility to serve users with meaningful search result rather than just a link. To fulfil this need, it seems like SSE is heavily relies on its behind technology either using ontology, natural language understanding, reasoning engine or contextual analysis [8].
Design
INTRODUCTION (HEADING 1)
Even how sophisticated the design, but if it is difficult to use, then it is still useless. It is a simple statement encompasses all types of application, including search engine. Furthermore, search engine is a gateway for users to explore and find information on the Web. The most activity done by user on the Web is searching [1], and searching on the Web also has become a daily activity for many people today [2] [3]. Due to that matter, making the search engine easy to use and accessible to everyone is vital, since information searching on the Web has been a major activity on the Internet.
On the other hand, Nielsen study has revealed that user is incredibly bad at finding things on the web [14]. Therefore it is important to put an effort to offer more supportive user interface. In that case, the successful factor of SSE is just not depending on its engine architecture but also on its features and interface design. A good quality of user interface is depending on its usability [16], a term which refers to those properties of the interface that determine how easy it is to use. Nielsen [17] has listed out five components of usability as stated in Table I.
Currently the structure of the Internet content is moving towards semantic phenomena. It is due to the explosion of the semantic web idea proposed by Tim Berners Lee[4]. The Semantic Web is described as an intelligent web; it can understand the data in it and even manage to relate and do reasoning to make it meaningful [5]. This semantic web technology also has motivated the search engine application to accommodate the semantic structure. Therefore, many semantic search engines have appeared lately such as Swoogle [6], DuckDuckGo, Bing, Hakia, SenseBot, and many more[7][8][9].
TABLE I.
There are many different types of search engines serving for different purposes. Some are web directories, advertisement search engine, meta-search engines, personalized search, question answering engines, image search, and special purpose search engines [10]. All of these variations play an important part in the search engine landscape with the aim of satisfying
978-1-4799-1574-3/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE
USABILITY COMPONENT
Learnability
How easy is it for users to accomplish basic tasks the first time they encounter the interface?
Efficiency
How quickly can users accomplish their tasks after they learn how to use the interface?
Memorability
After a period of non-use, how long does it take users to reestablish proficiency?
Errors
How many errors do users make, how severe are these errors, and how easy is it for users to recover from these errors?
Satisfaction
How pleasant or satisfying is it to use the interface?
Basis for designing interface is relies on this three user interface design principles; place users in control, reduce users’ memory load and make the user interface consistent [15].
142
2013 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, December 2 - 4, 2013, Sarawak, Malaysia
selection of SSE for this research is based on simple review by several search engine reviewer on the web [27][28][29][30]. All main pages of the SSE is captured. Then a simple query is tested to get the SERP. The SERP are also being captured. Then all features and elements on the interface of the SSE is gathered and put in a table. We presented all the interface screen shot in Figure. 1 – Figure. 8.
Additionally, Human Computer Interaction (HCI) practitioner and researcher also have proposed many sets of guideline and principle for building better interfaces, but most of the guideline is difficult to follow because it usually do not say how to achieve those guidelines. The consequences of that problem have made a lot of usability issues being discussed from time to time. II.
BACKGROUND
In [18], has stated, there are still many problems and challenges related to searching the Web. In addition, a statement made by Amit Singhal the senior vice president and software engineer of Google; “Search has moved from give me what I said to give me what want” [19] has really challenged the researchers. Therefore, a lot of research is aggressively being done in this area. The most concern in the semantic search engine is to deliver an accurate answer or meaningful search result based on the user’s query. In order to achieve that goal, therefore most of the research focus on its engine architecture [2]. Although there are thousands of general-purpose searchengines and search technologies improved considerably in recent years [20], most users still find it hard to retrieve effectively and efficiently. This really indicates that accessibility and usability are crucial for navigating the Internet and searching for information [21]. Some of the SSE interface is made to show that they are sophisticated enough in semantic until it makes the user difficult to use the site.. And some search engine only focusses to RDF (Resource Document Framework) and OWL (Web Ontology Language) [22] search, where it does not benefits much for general user at the current situation, since the Semantic Web is still in its early stage.
Figure 1. Hakia
Hakia is quite popular among existing semantic search engine. In the context of interface design, it applies a clean and clear main page with a simple search box. The SERP exhibit consistency and display in a good snippets.
A study has attested that the design of the search engine result page (SERP) may influence the spontaneous trustworthiness of the user [23]. The way of search result display on the SERP also can influence on how many task accomplish correctly and how fast they can complete their tasks [24].
Figure 2. DuckDuckGo
With his catchy duck picture as the logo has attracted user to try this SSE. DuckDuckGo also apply a simple search box on the main page, together offering extra tools for advanced searching. The SERP is quite nice because it offers answersinstead of just a link, but the link is in a long list without having pagination.
In the context of user interface, usability means a measure of quality on how easy user interfaces are to use. Usability also refers to methods for improving ease-of-use during the design process [25]. For any application on the web who wants to survive, must make sure this usability issue has taken good care enough. The recent article by Nielsen [26] reported that these days, the percentage of elderly Internet user is increasing. This upturn shows that interface design of Web should start to give attention to this group of user. Among the thing that should be taken into account are the font size should be at least 12-points, hyperlink and command button should be more prominent targets for easy clicking and can avoid erroneous click and increase the speed of user to hit the correct link. III.
EXISTING SEMANTIC SEARCH ENGINE INTERFACE DESIGN
Currently there are many SSE available on the Web. For this study, only 8 SSE are selected to be discussed. The
Figure 3. Bing
143
2013 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, December 2 - 4, 2013, Sarawak, Malaysia
provided. They build statistic of the related entity on their SERP.
Bing has taken outstanding action by having background image and it changes daily. Their nice background picture is associate with short info about the picture and the sources. Bing SERP is more likely to have a same layout screen as Google SERP.
Figure 7. Cluuz Figure 4. Kngine
Cluuz has a tiny search box on the main page. The SERP is impressive. It displays top related entities and visualized it with linked graph. Instead of giving link and an excerpt, they also support the result with related pictures.
Kngine hold a valiant tagline, “links are not answer”. This SSE has improved a lot with his approach. It has clean and clear search page. The SERP is also impressed with the answer section and a nice orientation of snippet view.
Figure 5. factbites
“Where results make sense” is the tagline represent factbites. It claims they are different and obvious from others. It has a cleaner and nicer search page. The SERP offer unlike other search result, they return relevant, informative results on your topic that don't necessarily mention the word you searched for
Figure 8. SenseBot
The main page is not a search box, but consist of command buttons. SenseBot tagline is “The Search Engine that finds sense in a heap of Web pages”. The interface design is also very simple. The SERP is quite rare compared to others. It generates a text summary of multiple Web pages on the topic of your search query and it displays a semantic cloud on top of the SERP. IV.
AVAILABLE FEATURES IN INTERAFCE OF EXISTING SEMANTIC SEARCH ENGINE
A detailed review was conducted for all selected SSE with the intention to identify the elements and features used in the interface. The objective is not to reward or judge those SSE but more to analyze and classify the predominant or prevalent elements, features and approaches used. The result is presented in Table II.
Figure 6. Lexxe
The main search page is simple, but it has one capability that makes them differ from others. It offers specific information search. The search engine capable to answer effectively if the query is based on the list of semantic keys
144
2013 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, December 2 - 4, 2013, Sarawak, Malaysia
Kngine
Hakia
DuckDuckGo
Factbites
Cluuz
SenseBot
Lexxe
FEATURE IN INTERFACE FOR SELECTED SEMANTIC SEARCH ENGINE
Bing
TABLE II.
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / /
Semantic Search Engine (SSE)
Simple Input Box Field Clean & Clear Main Screen Advance Search / Control / Refine Search Tool Query Suggestion Result Summary / Answer Show No Of Result / Hits 10 Result Per Page Different colour for visited and unvisited link Highlighted keyword / phrase Image Result Snippets View Videos Blog News Map Statistic Of Related Entity Related Entity Semantic Graph Tag Cloud Logo Tagline Multilingual About SSE FAQs Contact Tour / Demo Feedback Setting Sign In Shared To Social Network Advertisement Terms Of Use
except for Kngine, factbites and Lexxe. However those three SSE use the advertisement only to advertise their product. Only 3 SSE (Bing, DuckDuckGo, Cluuz) put an effort to offer advanced search tool. Even though this tool has been reported that are not widely used by user lately, but it is still useful for expert user who needs to filter some information [31]. Query suggestion is another useful feature that will lead user to success in their searching task [3]. The success story of Google Suggest could be has inspired Bing, Kngine and Lexxe to apply it into their system. Some SSE act as a question answering engine. Instead of giving a list of relevant links, the question answering engine will provide an answer or a summary to a user’s query. Kngine, DuckDuckGo, factbites and SenseBot has this capability to impress the user. Recent studies revealed that user normally will only examine the first top 10 of the result link given on the SERP [32]. But it seems that more SSE do not take this into their consideration since 5 out of 8 selected SSE display a long list link with no pagination on their SERP. Changing the color of visited links in SERP is also another element being neglected by many of the selected SSE. This is seen as a minor issue, but actually it will give a big impact in avoiding user to keep returning to the same page. By highlighting the keyword or phrase in a snippet view will give a big different to the user’s satisfaction. 75% of selected SSE adopts this element on their SERP, but not for Kngine and SenseBot. Displaying image result on SERP is helpful for users to get more information of their query. From our study, 7 out of 8 the selected SSE has image results in their SERP. Figure 9 shows the result in the chart view.
Table II shows that 5 out of 8 SSE applied the principle of clean and clear main page screen. And all of them use a simple search box for query input. This complies with the principle of simplicity in order to improve usability.
Figure 9. Interface Features Chart
Advertisement in a search engine would distract user’s focus on finding relevant result. The analysis also showed that most of the SSE did not put any advert on their application
145
2013 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, December 2 - 4, 2013, Sarawak, Malaysia
V.
DISCUSSION
Currently, there are no formal guidelines defining the most appropriate components to design a good interface for a semantic search engine. So based on our findings, we would like to highlight some useful guideline that can make up the SSE more effective, efficient and importantly is usable. See Table III. TABLE III. Category
Highlighted Guidelines
General Font size should at least 12-point and resizable.
Clean and clear main search page.
Search box should be on the main page not a link.
Simple search box with considerable length.
No advertisement or anything looks like advertisement and animated images. Option for query suggestion feature. Offer spelling checker to correct wrong words in user query. Advance search tool is not necessary, and not on the main search page. Search Engine Result Page (SERP)
Offer answer or summary of search result on top of SERP with the support of relevant link below.
HIGHLIGHTED GUIDELINES FOR SSE INTERFACE DESIGN
Consistency of the system flow and interface design.
Main Search Page
Use different colour for visited and unvisited link.
Rank the most relevant link result at first top 10. Result should display in list of ascending.
Purpose To increase user confidence and make them feel in control of the system. 12-point font size is considerable to elderly user and resizable will give freedom to user [26]. Simplicity in interface design and approach will give a good mental model to user. User is always wishes to find their information as fast as possible. Simplicity and can handle long or complex query input since user normally target for SSE to solve complex query. Advertisement and animation can distract user focus. Lead user to relevant queries and save time and keystroke. Prevent user from getting no result or wrong results. Advance search always leads user into trouble. User will only examine the first top 10 of the result link given on the SERP. Will help user to complete their search task
Usability Compliance
Supporting search result with images (if available)
Memorability
Display meaningful excerpt with scannable text (highlighted keyword) for each link of result in snippets view.
Satisfaction
Learnability
quickly and more efficient in finding relevant link. To prevent user from wasting time visiting to the same page[33]. Semantic Web user is looking for answer not a link.
It will enrich user with fruitful information. User may get answer or information by just reading the excerpt in snippets view without need to click and open the link. Save time!
Efficiency & Error Handling
Efficiency & Satisfaction
Satisfaction
Satisfaction
Next we proposed a sample of interface design (Figure 10 and Figure 11) for semantic search engine based on the guidelines discussed in previous paragraph. Both suggested interface are comply to the usability components.
Learnability & Memorability
Learnability & Memorability
Satisfaction Efficiency & Error Handling Efficiency & Error Handling Error Handling
Figure 10. Main Search Page
Efficiency
Efficiency
146
2013 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, December 2 - 4, 2013, Sarawak, Malaysia
[11]
[12] [13]
[14] [15] Figure 11. Search Engine Resutl Page
VI.
[16]
CONCLUSION
Numerous studies about search engine being done, but most of them focus on improving the relevance of the search result. Little effort has seen to be involved evaluating the interface of the search engine. This preliminary study has reviewed 8 SSE exist on current Web. The focus is on the feature and elements contain in the interface of the selected SSE. The finding has revealed the predominant and prevalent elements used in current SSE such as simple search box, clean and clear search screen, question answering approach, highlighted keyword and scannable text in snippet view. Finally we highlighted some significant guidelines for designing SSE.
[17]
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
[21]
[18] [19]
[20]
This research is funded by Ministry of Higher Education (Malaysia) and Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) under Long Term Research Grant Scheme (LRGS) (LRGS/TD/2011/UiTM/ICT/01).
[22] [23]
REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]
[10]
[24]
R. Guha, R. McCool, and E. Miller, “Semantic search,” Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on World Wide Web WWW ’03, p. 700, 2003. G. Golovchinsky, A. Diriye, and T. Dunnigan, “The future is in the past : Designing for exploratory search,” pp. 52–61. S. S. Al-rawi, A. T. Sadiq, and S. A. Hamad, “Design and Evaluation of Semantic Guided Search Engine.” International Journal of Web Engineerung, 1(3), pp. 15–23, 2012. T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila, “The Semantic Web,” Scientific American, pp. 29–37, 2001. T. Berners-Lee and M. Fischetti, Weaving the Web : The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web by its Inventor. Harper San Francisco: , 1999. T. Finin, J. Mayfield, a. Joshi, R. S. Cost, and C. Fink, “Information Retrieval and the Semantic Web,” Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p. 113a–113a. R. Sujatha, “Semantic search engine : A survey,” vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 1806–1811, 2011. G. Sudeepthi, G. Anuradha, P. M. Surendra, and P. Babu, “A Survey on Semantic Web Search Engine,” vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 241– 245, 2012. D. Tümer, M. A. Shah, and Y. Bitirim, “An Empirical Evaluation on Semantic Search Performance of Keyword-Based and Semantic Search Engines: Google, Yahoo, Msn and Hakia,” 2009 Fourth International Conference on Internet Monitoring and Protection, pp. 51–55, 2009. Mark Levene, An Introduction to Search Engines and Web Navigation, 2nd ed. Wiley, 2010.
[25] [26] [27]
[28] [29] [30]
[31] [32] [33]
147
G. Madhu, a Govardhan, and T. K. V. Rajinikanth, “Intelligent Semantic Web Search Engines: A Brief Survey,” International journal of Web & Semantic Technology, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 34–42, Jan. 2011. P. Mika, “Microsearch : An Interface for Semantic Search,” 2008. G. Golovchinsky, A. Dunnigan, and A. Diriye, “Designing a tool for exploratory information seeking,” Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference extended abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts CHI EA ’12, p. 1799, 2012. J. Nielsen, “Converting Search into Navigation, Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox: March 16, 2013.” Available at: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/search-navigation/. T. Mandel, “Chapter 5 The Golden Rules of User Interface Design,” pp. 1–28, 1997. K. Elbedweihy, S. N. Wrigley, and F. Ciravegna, “Evaluating Semantic Search Query Approaches with Expert and Casual Users,” pp. 274–286, 2012. J. Nielsen, “Usability 101: Introduction to Usability, Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox: January 4. 2012.” Available at: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/usability-101-introduction-tousability/. R. Baeza-Yates, “Information retrieval in the Web: beyond current search engines,” International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, vol. 34, no. 2–3, pp. 97–104, Nov. 2003. A. Singhal, “Official Blog: Technologies behind Google ranking,” 2008. [Online]. Available: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/technologies-behindgoogle-ranking.html. G. Stumme, a Hotho, and B. Berendt, “Semantic Web MiningState of the art and future directions,” Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 124–143, Jun. 2006. M. Buzzi, P. Andronico, and B. Leporini, “Accessibility and Usability of Search Engine Interfaces : Preliminary Testing,” 2004. E. Terzi and A. Vakali, “Knowledge Representation , Ontologies , and the,” pp. 382–387. Y. Kammerer, “How the Interface Design Influences Users ’ Spontaneous Trustworthiness Evaluations of Web Search Results : Comparing a List and a Grid Interface,” vol. 1, no. 212, pp. 299– 306, 2010. Y. Kammerer, “Gaze-based Web Search : The Impact of Interface Design on Search Result Selection,” vol. 1, no. 212, pp. 191–194, 2010. J. Nielsen, “Usability Engineering.” Academic Press, Boston, 1993. J. Nielsen, “Seniors as Web Users, Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox: May 28, 2013.” . Available at: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/usability-for-senior-citizens/. “Top 10+ Semantic Search Engines: Best Alternative to Google Search Engine to Get More Accurate Results.” Available at: http://www.webgranth.com/top-10-semantic-search-engines-bestalternative-to-google-search-engine-to-get-more-accurate-results. “Top 10 Best Semantic Search Engines To Get More Accurate Results.” Available at: http://savedelete.com/top-10-best-semanticsearch-engines-to-get-more-accurate-results.html. “Top 7 Semantic Search Engines As An Alternative To Google.” Available at: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/top-7-semantic-searchengines-alternative-google-search/. “9 Semantic Search Engines That Will Change the World of Search.” Available at: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/semantic-searchengines/9832/. “Search: Visible and Simple, Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox: May 13, 2001.” Available at: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/searchvisible-and-simple/. R. Baeza-Yates and B. Ribeiro-Neto, Modern Information Retrieval : the concept and technology behind search, Second. Addison Wesley, 2011. J. Nielsen, “Top 10 Mistakes in Web Design, Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox: January 1, 2011.” Available at:http://www.nngroup.com/articles/top-10-mistakes-web-design/.
