[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GRIFFIN-205?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16648899#comment-16648899
]
Lionel Liu commented on GRIFFIN-205:
------------------------------------
In my opinion, the "total", "miss" and "matched" counts in accuracy measure
results are raw metrics, they could be aggregated in later calculation. But the
"matchedFraction" field is a calculated metrics, which could not be used in
later aggregation. Combining these metrics in the same metric value might
mislead the users.
I think it's OK to add "matchedFraction" field in accuracy metrics, but we need
to clarify the difference between the count metric and fraction metric in
document.
BTW, if we add this field in batch mode, it would be better to keep the
consistency in streaming mode as well.
> Accuracy measure check should provide matchedFraction to store
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GRIFFIN-205
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GRIFFIN-205
> Project: Griffin (Incubating)
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: accuracy-batch, accuracy-real-time
> Affects Versions: 0.3.1-incubating
> Reporter: Artem Shutak
> Assignee: Artem Shutak
> Priority: Major
>
> Currently, {{accuracy}} measure results contains "total", "miss" and
> "matched" counts.
> As a result, It's hard to analyze accuracy fraction based on results stored
> in ElasticSearch, because ElasticSearch does not provide straight forward
> capability to get "field divided by field" query results.
> {{Accuracy}} measure results should also contain {{matchedFraction}} field.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
