臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

P2P網路中如何有效率的找到需要的資源與節點是重要的問題，本研究希望了解不同搜尋模式對於P2P網路中資源搜尋的影響。蒐集資訊管理研究所學生MSN Messenger中的聯絡人清單建立社會關係模型，建立社會網路(social network)與知識網路(knowledge network)供模擬實驗之用。蒐集資訊管理研究所學生研究相關議題之電子檔案作為搜尋之用，利用Google Desktop將檔案製作索引供搜尋之用。比較各種互動模式，廣度優先互動模式(Breadth First Interaction, BFI)，隨機選擇節點的互動模式(Random Walk Interaction, RWI)，及以整個網路中最常被詢問(Most Popularity Interaction, MPI)與最不常不詢問的節點(Less Popularity Interaction, LPI)互動的互動模式在不同網路模型中，針對搜尋結果、訊息使用量、訪問節點數、勞力分配與成本效益，並對其作敏感度分析。結果顯示BFI互動模式雖然有很好的搜尋結果，但成本上較其他互動模式為高，RWI隨機挑選節點互動但中心性較高的節點仍會有較高的互動機率，MPI與網路中受歡迎的節點互動，卻往往無法搜尋到每個節點，LPI可以均衡網路中的流量並與所有節點互動，本研究建議可依照互動的目的挑整不同的互動模式。

It is an important issue to find peers and resources efficiently in a P2P network. In this study we investigate the impact of different interaction methods on fleeciness and cost in a P2P network. We collected MIS students’ MSN Messenger buddy lists to create social network (SN) and knowledge network (KN) for simulation experiments. And we also collected these students’ documents on their research topic as the seeking targets, used Google Desktop to create index file for all the documents. We compared breadth first interaction (BFI), random walk interaction (RWI), and most popularity interaction (MPI) and less popularity interaction (LPI) in two network models (KN and SN), used seeking success rate, the number of messages, number of peers per query, labor distribution and cost/performance ratio to measure interaction method, and we modified the network to test the sensitivity of all interaction method. The results show that BFI has a great performance in seeking success rate but the cost is huge. Although RWI randomly chooses peers to interact, the peers with higher centrality will still get more messages. MPI will interact with popular peers but sometimes it can’t reach with all the peers. LPI would balance the traffic in the network and all peers. Finally we suggested interaction methods in P2P network should depend on the interaction goals.

目錄

表次 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------iii
圖次---------------------------------------------------------------------------------v

第壹章 序論 ---------------------------------------------------------------------1
第一節 研究背景與動機-------------------------------------------------1
第二節 研究目的----------------------------------------------------------2
第三節 研究流程 ---------------------------------------------------------2
第貳章 文獻探討-----------------------------------------------------------------5
第一節 點對點網路-------------------------------------------------------5
第二節 知識分享----------------------------------------------------------9
第三節 知識分享與社會關係------------------------------------------13
第四節 知識分享與點對點網路----------------------------16
第五節 社會網路---------------------------------------------------------19
第六節 JXTA -------------------------------------------------------------24
第參章 研究方法---------------------------------------------------------------29
第一節 研究架構---------------------------------------------------------29
第二節 研究設計---------------------------------------------------------38
第三節 評估指標 -------------------------------------------------------40
第四節 研究範圍---------------------------------------------------------44
第五節 研究限制---------------------------------------------------------45
第肆章 研究結果---------------------------------------------------------------47
第一節 模擬環境---------------------------------------------------------47
第二節 模擬結果---------------------------------------------------------51
第伍章 結論與建議 --------------------------------------------------------73
第一節 結論 -------------------------------------------------------------73
第二節 建議---------------------------------------------------------------75
第三節 未來改進方向---------------------------------------------------76
參考文獻--------------------------------------------------------------------------78

參考文獻

中文

1.尤克強，知識管理與創新，天下文化，2001。

2.王成隆，組織知能分享意願與文化、信任、個人因素關係之研究-以各級教師為例，元智大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，2005。

3.張火燦、劉淑寧，從社會網路理論探討員工知識分享，人力資源管理學報，2002，頁101-113。

4. 安開赫，商業社群中人際互動對忠誠度之影響-社會網路觀點，輔仁大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，2005。

5.曾彥博，點對點知識分享社群與同儕推薦機制之研究，輔仁大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，2004。

6.陳文廣，影響使用者接受知識社群分享知識因素之研究，輔仁大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，2004。

7.胡瑋珊譯，企業創新的螺旋，中國生產力中心，2004。

英文

1.Adamic, L.A., Adar. E., How to search in social network. Social Networks, 27 (3) , 2005, pp. 187-203.

2.Axton, C., Gear, R., Macehiter, N., Woods, E., Peer-to-peer computing: Applications and infrastructure, Ovum Report, 2002.

3.Bartol, K.M., & Srivastava, A., Encouraging Knowledge Sharing:The Role of Organizational Reward Systems.Journal of Lendership and Organization Studies, 2002

4.Bock, G. W., & Kim, Y.-G., Breaking the myths of rewards: an exploratory study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Information Resources Management Journal, 14, 2002, pp. 14–21.

5.Bonifacio, M., Bouquet, P., Mameli, G., & Nori, M. KEx: A peer-to-peer solution for distributed knowledge management., PAKM 02, 2002, pp. 490-500.

6.Burt, R. S., Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. 1992.

7.Davenport, T. & Prusak, L., Working Knowledge : How Organizations Manage What They Know, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1998.

8.Despres, C. & Chauvel, D., Knowledge management, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, 1999, pp. 110-20.

9.Damiani, E., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P., Violante, F., A Reputation-Based Approach for Choosing Reliable Resources in Peer-to-Peer Networks. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’02) , ACM, 2002, pp. 199-206.

10.Daswani, N. & Garcia-Molina, H. Query-flood DoS attacks in gnutella. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. CCS '02, 2002, pp. 181-192.

11.Ehrig, M., Tempich, C., Broekstra, J., van Harmelen, F., Sabou, M., Siebes, R., Staab, S., Stuckenschmidt, H.: SWAP - ontology-based knowledge management with peer-to-peer technology. WOW2003, 2003.

12.Erickson, T. & Kellogg, W., Knowledge Communities: Online Environments for Supporting Knowledge Managements and its Social Context, Sharing Expertise: Beyond Knowledge Management, Cambridge, MA MIT Press, 2003, pp. 299-326.

13.Freeman, L. C., Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarifications. Social Networks, 1979, pp. 215–239.
14.Garton , L., Haythirnthwaite, C. & Wellman, B., Studying Online Social Networks. Jpurnal of Computer-Medicated Communication, 1997.

15.Granivetterm S,. The strength of weak ties. America Journal of Sociology, 78 , 1973, pp. 1360-1380.

16.Haase, P., Broekstra, J., Ehrig, M., Menken, M., Mika, P., Plechawski, M., Pyszlak, P., Schnizler, B., Siebes, R. Staab, S. & Tempich, C., Bibster-a semantics-based bibliographic peer-to-peer system. ISWC 2004, 2004, pp. 122-136.

17.Hall, H., Social Exchange for Knowledge Exchange, Management Knowledge: Conversations and the Critiques, 2001, pp. 10-11.

18.Hendriks, P., Why share knowledge? the influence of ICT on motivation of knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 2, 1999, pp. 91-100.

19.Kwok, J. & Gao, S., Knowledge sharing community in P2P Network: a study of motivational perspective, Journal of Knowledge Management, 2004, pp. 94-102.

20.Knoke, D. & Kuklinski, J. H., Network Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1982.

21.Ladd, A., and Mark A. Ward., An investigation of environmental factors influencing knowledge transfer .Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, August, 2002, pp. 145-156.

22.Lu, J. & Callan, J., Content-based retrieval in hybrid peer-to-peer networks. In: Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on Information and knowledge management. S. ACM Press. 2003, pp. 199-206.

23.Manoj, P. & Anjana S., P2P networking: an information sharing alternative. IEEE Computing Practices, 2001, pp. 31-38.

24.Mitchell, R. H., Magnesium limonite and its role in kimber- lite petrogenesis, 1973, pp. 301-311.

25.Nelson, K. & Cooprider, J. The Contribution of Shared Knowledge to Is Group Performance, MIS Quarterly December 1669,20 (4) , pp. 409-430.

26.Newell, A. (1982) . The knowledge level. Artificial Intelligence, 18 (1) , 87-127.

27.Nissen, M., Kamel, M., Sengupta, K., Integrated Analysis and Design of Knowledge Systems and Processes. Information Resources Management, 2000.

28.Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995) . The knowledge- creating company. New York: Oxford University.

29.Mangisengi, O., Essmayr, W. P2P knowledge management: an investigation of the technical architecture and main processes. DEXA 2003, September 2003, pp. 787-795.

30.Senge, P., Sharing Knowledge. Executive Excellence, 1997.

31.Tiwana, A., Affinity to infinity in peer-to-peer knowledge platforms. Communications of the ACM, 46 (5) , 2003, pp. 76-80.

32.Wellman, Barry. "Which Types of Ties and Networks Give What Kinds of Social Support?" Advances in Group Processes 9, 1992, pp. 207-235.

33.Wijnhoven, F., Knowledge Logistics in Business Contexts: Analyzing and
Diagnosing Knowledge Sharing by Logistics Concepts, Knowledge and Process Management, 1998, pp. 143-157.

34.Zhang , J., & Ackerman, M., S., Searching For Expertise in Social Networks: A simulation of Potential Strategies, GROUP '05, 2005, pp. 71-80.