评价高校网站质量的算法比较性能

Tenia Wahyuningrum, N. Rokhman, Aina Musdholifah
{"title":"评价高校网站质量的算法比较性能","authors":"Tenia Wahyuningrum, N. Rokhman, Aina Musdholifah","doi":"10.1109/CONMEDIA.2017.8266025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rapid use of the internet in education field encourages website developers to make improvements in university website quality. University websites are also part of the criteria of a higher education institution performance appraisal. Thus, a good university is considered to have a good website. The website reflects the popularity and prestige of a college. There are at least three university ranking agencies of the world with different ratings on the quality of the website. Due to several elaborated and numerous criteria, the quality rating of the website is often associated with Multi-Criteria Decision-Making issues. Linear Weightage Model (LWM) and Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) are the simplest algorithm for data rank. This paper aims to compare LWM and SAW algorithm performance to determine the best method on ranking University websites. This research uses five testing of usability criteria: load time, page rank, traffic, stickiness, and backlink. The results of LWM algorithm of the experiment using the language of C++ have more rapid execution time in comparison to SAW. Based on the results of Pair sample t test, both algorithms have significant different effects on ranking results because of the different of normalization process.","PeriodicalId":403944,"journal":{"name":"2017 4th International Conference on New Media Studies (CONMEDIA)","volume":"214 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Algorithm comparison performance in assessing the quality of university websites\",\"authors\":\"Tenia Wahyuningrum, N. Rokhman, Aina Musdholifah\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/CONMEDIA.2017.8266025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The rapid use of the internet in education field encourages website developers to make improvements in university website quality. University websites are also part of the criteria of a higher education institution performance appraisal. Thus, a good university is considered to have a good website. The website reflects the popularity and prestige of a college. There are at least three university ranking agencies of the world with different ratings on the quality of the website. Due to several elaborated and numerous criteria, the quality rating of the website is often associated with Multi-Criteria Decision-Making issues. Linear Weightage Model (LWM) and Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) are the simplest algorithm for data rank. This paper aims to compare LWM and SAW algorithm performance to determine the best method on ranking University websites. This research uses five testing of usability criteria: load time, page rank, traffic, stickiness, and backlink. The results of LWM algorithm of the experiment using the language of C++ have more rapid execution time in comparison to SAW. Based on the results of Pair sample t test, both algorithms have significant different effects on ranking results because of the different of normalization process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":403944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 4th International Conference on New Media Studies (CONMEDIA)\",\"volume\":\"214 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 4th International Conference on New Media Studies (CONMEDIA)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/CONMEDIA.2017.8266025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 4th International Conference on New Media Studies (CONMEDIA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CONMEDIA.2017.8266025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

互联网在教育领域的迅速应用,促使网站开发者不断提高高校网站的质量。大学网站也是高等教育机构绩效评估标准的一部分。因此,一个好的大学被认为有一个好的网站。该网站反映了一所大学的受欢迎程度和声望。世界上至少有三家大学排名机构对该网站的质量进行了不同的评级。由于有几个详细的和众多的标准,网站的质量评级往往与多标准决策问题有关。线性加权模型(LWM)和简单加性加权(SAW)是最简单的数据排序算法。本文旨在比较LWM和SAW算法的性能,以确定大学网站排名的最佳方法。这项研究使用了五个可用性标准测试:加载时间、页面排名、流量、粘性和反向链接。实验结果表明,用c++语言编写的LWM算法的执行速度比SAW更快。根据配对样本t检验的结果,由于归一化过程的不同,两种算法对排序结果的影响有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Algorithm comparison performance in assessing the quality of university websites
The rapid use of the internet in education field encourages website developers to make improvements in university website quality. University websites are also part of the criteria of a higher education institution performance appraisal. Thus, a good university is considered to have a good website. The website reflects the popularity and prestige of a college. There are at least three university ranking agencies of the world with different ratings on the quality of the website. Due to several elaborated and numerous criteria, the quality rating of the website is often associated with Multi-Criteria Decision-Making issues. Linear Weightage Model (LWM) and Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) are the simplest algorithm for data rank. This paper aims to compare LWM and SAW algorithm performance to determine the best method on ranking University websites. This research uses five testing of usability criteria: load time, page rank, traffic, stickiness, and backlink. The results of LWM algorithm of the experiment using the language of C++ have more rapid execution time in comparison to SAW. Based on the results of Pair sample t test, both algorithms have significant different effects on ranking results because of the different of normalization process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
UI/UX analysis & design for mobile e-commerce application prototype on Gramedia.com Factors affecting procrastination in the virtual teams: An experimental research approach based on the theory of planned behavior Evaluation of behavior estimation using Ward's method in multifunction outlet system A dempster-shafer approach to an expert system design in diagnosis of febrile disease Performance comparison of Wi-Fi and LTE for Internet of Things on named data networking
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1