[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8633?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16740469#comment-16740469
]
Jim Ferenczi commented on LUCENE-8633:
--------------------------------------
+1 to remove the terms statistics and to rely solely on the number and extent
of the intervals. Choosing the pivot is really difficult though and cannot be
computed statistically like the feature query does. Maybe we should have a
default pivot of 1 and make it configurable in the constructor ? We could also
make all feature functions available ?
> Remove term weighting from interval scoring
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-8633
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8633
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Alan Woodward
> Assignee: Alan Woodward
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: LUCENE-8633.patch
>
>
> IntervalScorer currently uses the same scoring mechanism as SpanScorer,
> summing the IDF of all possibly matching terms from its parent
> IntervalsSource and using that in conjunction with a sloppy frequency to
> produce a similarity-based score. This doesn't really make sense, however,
> as it means that terms that don't appear in a document can still contribute
> to the score, and appears to make scores from interval queries comparable
> with scores from term or phrase queries when they really aren't.
> I'd like to explore a different scoring mechanism for intervals, based purely
> on sloppy frequency and ignoring term weighting. This should make the scores
> easier to reason about, as well as making them useful for things like
> proximity boosting on boolean queries.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
