[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-965?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Grant Ingersoll resolved LUCENE-965.
------------------------------------

       Resolution: Incomplete
    Fix Version/s:     (was: 4.0)
    Lucene Fields: Patch Available  (was: Patch Available,New)

This seems to have gone silent and is likely replaced by the pluggable 
similarity options.
                
> Implement a state-of-the-art retrieval function in Lucene
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-965
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-965
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core/search
>    Affects Versions: 2.2
>            Reporter: Hui Fang
>         Attachments: axiomaticFunction.patch
>
>
> We implemented the axiomatic retrieval function, which is a state-of-the-art 
> retrieval function, to 
> replace the default similarity function in Lucene. We compared the 
> performance of these two functions and reported the results at 
> http://sifaka.cs.uiuc.edu/hfang/lucene/Lucene_exp.pdf. 
> The report shows that the performance of the axiomatic retrieval function is 
> much better than the default function. The axiomatic retrieval function is 
> able to find more relevant documents and users can see more relevant 
> documents in the top-ranked documents. Incorporating such a state-of-the-art 
> retrieval function could improve the search performance of all the 
> applications which were built upon Lucene. 
> Most changes related to the implementation are made in AXSimilarity, 
> TermScorer and TermQuery.java.  However, many test cases are hand coded to 
> test whether the implementation of the default function is correct. Thus, I 
> also made the modification to many test files to make the new retrieval 
> function pass those cases. In fact, we found that some old test cases are not 
> reasonable. For example, in the testQueries02 of TestBoolean2.java, 
> the query is "+w3 xx", and we have two documents "w1 xx w2 yy w3" and "w1 w3 
> xx w2 yy w3". 
> The second document should be more relevant than the first one, because it 
> has more 
> occurrences of the query term "w3". But the original test case would require 
> us to rank 
> the first document higher than the second one, which is not reasonable. 

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to