On 4 Nov 2005, at 23:08, Ahmed El-dawy wrote:
BTW, I think there's a newer version of Lucene that I can't get, my
version is 1.4.3 and I didn't find any newer version at the site. For
example, the QueryParser in my version doesn't care with term position
and I had to override it by myself to
On Saturday 05 November 2005 01:29, Erik Hatcher wrote:
On 4 Nov 2005, at 18:32, Sean O'Connor wrote:
I'm posting this primarily hoping to give back a tiny bit to a very
helpful community. More likely however, someone else will open my
eyes to an easier approach than what I outline
Hallo,
I know my topic is a little bit out of topic. but I am trying and trying
to do something without no effort. I have a very simple application.I
tested this application on my homepc with tomcat 3.3.2 and it worked.
But on the the server off my webhosting agency it does not work. I
Yes, the Similarity class existed in version 1.2, but no description is
included in its JavaDoc. After somebody could point me to the formular I
would also like to know if the formula ensures the score is always between
0.0 and 1.0 (without any boosting)... Is this the case?
Karl
---
Hello all,
I am wondering how many of you actually work with own scoring mechanism
(overwriting Lucenes standard scoring) and how many of you do work on how to
normalise this score.
I would like to add a second score on top of Lucenes TF/IDF score. The
resulting score is most likely higher then
Lucene 1.2 is before my time, but check if the functions are
implemented the same as the current version (they probably are).
Scores are not naturally = 1, but for most search methods (including
all that return Hits) they are normalized to be between 1 and 0 if the
highest score is greater than
I always thought that Lucene search is always returning a Hits object. In
what occation would this not be the case?
Karl
--- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
Von: Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Scoring formula
Datum: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 17:49:40 -0500
0.0 - 1.0 score - yes.
Otis
--- Karl Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, the Similarity class existed in version 1.2, but no description
is
included in its JavaDoc. After somebody could point me to the
formular I
would also like to know if the formula ensures the score is always
between
TopDocs search()
TopFieldDocs search(...)
...
Just peek at the IndexSearcher.java source.
Otis
--- Karl Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I always thought that Lucene search is always returning a Hits
object. In
what occation would this not be the case?
Karl
--- Ursprüngliche
Lucene just takes the highest score returned, and divides all scores
by this max_score. So max_score / max_score = 1.0, and voila.
On 11/5/05, Karl Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
I am wondering how many of you actually work with own scoring mechanism
(overwriting Lucenes standard
if so the top score should always be 1.0. Isn't so.
Or does boosting multiple individual fields wreck that ?
sameer
On 11/6/05, Chris Lamprecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lucene just takes the highest score returned, and divides all scores
by this max_score. So max_score / max_score = 1.0, and
Hi,
I know that there are several ports of Lucene, like
cLucene, pLucene, etc. Are there other ports of Nutch
besides java?
Many thanks.
__
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
Does the IndexWriter.mergeFactor remain the same
effect on the RAM use after the introduce of
IndexWriter.minMergeDocs?
The minMergeDocs was introduced into
IndexWriter(Revision 1.21 in cvs) in order to control
the number of
Documents merged in RAMDirectory independently of the
mergeFactor (see
13 matches
Mail list logo
