Meeting in a Polygon by Anonymous Oblivious Robots

The Meeting problem for $k\geq 2$ searchers in a polygon $P$ (possibly with holes) consists in making the searchers move within $P$, according to a distributed algorithm, in such a way that at least two of them eventually come to see each other, regardless of their initial positions. The polygon is initially unknown to the searchers, and its edges obstruct both movement and vision. Depending on the shape of $P$, we minimize the number of searchers $k$ for which the Meeting problem is solvable. Specifically, if $P$ has a rotational symmetry of order $\sigma$ (where $\sigma=1$ corresponds to no rotational symmetry), we prove that $k=\sigma+1$ searchers are sufficient, and the bound is tight. Furthermore, we give an improved algorithm that optimally solves the Meeting problem with $k=2$ searchers in all polygons whose barycenter is not in a hole (which includes the polygons with no holes). Our algorithms can be implemented in a variety of standard models of mobile robots operating in Look-Compute-Move cycles. For instance, if the searchers have memory but are anonymous, asynchronous, and have no agreement on a coordinate system or a notion of clockwise direction, then our algorithms work even if the initial memory contents of the searchers are arbitrary and possibly misleading. Moreover, oblivious searchers can execute our algorithms as well, encoding information by carefully positioning themselves within the polygon. This code is computable with basic arithmetic operations, and each searcher can geometrically construct its own destination point at each cycle using only a compass. We stress that such memoryless searchers may be located anywhere in the polygon when the execution begins, and hence the information they initially encode is arbitrary. Our algorithms use a self-stabilizing map construction subroutine which is of independent interest.Comment: 37 pages, 9 figure

The effects on topic familiarity on online search behaviour and use of relevance criteria

This paper presents an experimental study on the effect of topic familiarity on the assessment behaviour of online searchers. In particular we investigate the effect of topic familiarity on the resources and relevance criteria used by searchers. Our results indicate that searching on an unfamiliar topic leads to use of more generic and fewer specialised resources and that searchers employ different relevance criteria when searching on less familiar topics

Job Searchers, Job Matches and the Elasticity of Matching

This paper stresses the importance of a specification of the matching function in which the measure of job matches corresponds to the measure of job searchers. In many empirical studies on the matching function this requirement has not been fulfilled because it is difficult to find information about employed job searchers and job searchers from outside the labour market. In this paper, we specify and estimate matching functions where the flow corresponds to the correct stock. We use several approximations for the stock of non-unemployed job searchers. We find that the estimation results are sensitive to the approximation we use. Our main conclusion is that it is important to account for the behaviour of non-unemployed job searchers since otherwise the estimated parameters of the matching function may be seriously biased.unemployment;vacancies;matching

Re-examining the potential effectiveness of interactive query expansion

Much attention has been paid to the relative effectiveness of interactive query expansion versus automatic query expansion. Although interactive query expansion has the potential to be an effective means of improving a search, in this paper we show that, on average, human searchers are less likely than systems to make good expansion decisions. To enable good expansion decisions, searchers must have adequate instructions on how to use interactive query expansion functionalities. We show that simple instructions on using interactive query expansion do not necessarily help searchers make good expansion decisions and discuss difficulties found in making query expansion decisions

Parallel Exhaustive Search without Coordination

We analyze parallel algorithms in the context of exhaustive search over totally ordered sets. Imagine an infinite list of "boxes", with a "treasure" hidden in one of them, where the boxes' order reflects the importance of finding the treasure in a given box. At each time step, a search protocol executed by a searcher has the ability to peek into one box, and see whether the treasure is present or not. By equally dividing the workload between them, $k$ searchers can find the treasure $k$ times faster than one searcher. However, this straightforward strategy is very sensitive to failures (e.g., crashes of processors), and overcoming this issue seems to require a large amount of communication. We therefore address the question of designing parallel search algorithms maximizing their speed-up and maintaining high levels of robustness, while minimizing the amount of resources for coordination. Based on the observation that algorithms that avoid communication are inherently robust, we analyze the best running time performance of non-coordinating algorithms. Specifically, we devise non-coordinating algorithms that achieve a speed-up of $9/8$ for two searchers, a speed-up of $4/3$ for three searchers, and in general, a speed-up of $\frac{k}{4}(1+1/k)^2$ for any $k\geq 1$ searchers. Thus, asymptotically, the speed-up is only four times worse compared to the case of full-coordination, and our algorithms are surprisingly simple and hence applicable. Moreover, these bounds are tight in a strong sense as no non-coordinating search algorithm can achieve better speed-ups. Overall, we highlight that, in faulty contexts in which coordination between the searchers is technically difficult to implement, intrusive with respect to privacy, and/or costly in term of resources, it might well be worth giving up on coordination, and simply run our non-coordinating exhaustive search algorithms

Searching and Stopping: An Analysis of Stopping Rules and Strategies

Searching naturally involves stopping points, both at a query level (how far down the ranked list should I go?) and at a session level (how many queries should I issue?). Understanding when searchers stop has been of much interest to the community because it is fundamental to how we evaluate search behaviour and performance. Research has shown that searchers find it difficult to formalise stopping criteria, and typically resort to their intuition of what is "good enough". While various heuristics and stopping criteria have been proposed, little work has investigated how well they perform, and whether searchers actually conform to any of these rules. In this paper, we undertake the first large scale study of stopping rules, investigating how they influence overall session performance, and which rules best match actual stopping behaviour. Our work is focused on stopping at the query level in the context of ad-hoc topic retrieval, where searchers undertake search tasks within a fixed time period. We show that stopping strategies based upon the disgust or frustration point rules - both of which capture a searcher's tolerance to non-relevance - typically result in (i) the best overall performance, and (ii) provide the closest approximation to actual searcher behaviour, although a fixed depth approach also performs remarkably well. Findings from this study have implications regarding how we build measures, and how we conduct simulations of search behaviours