Tunneling (rat-holing?) into the cross-recommender and Solr+Mahout version.
Things to note: 1) The pure Mahout XRecommenderJob needs a cross-LLR or a cross-similairty job. Currently there is only cooccurrence for sparsification, which is far from optimal. This might take the form of a cross RSJ with two DRMs as input. I can't commit to this but would commit to adding it to the XRecommenderJob. 2) output to Solr needs a lot of options implemented and tested. The hand-run test should be made into some junits. I'm slowly doing this. 3) the Solr query API is unimplemented unless someone else is working on that. I'm building one in a demo site but it looks to me like a static recommender API is not going to be all that useful and maybe a document describing how to do it with the Solr query interface would be best, especially for a first step. The reasoning here is that it is so tempting to mix in metadata to the recommendation query that a static API is not so obvious. For the demo site the recommender API will be prototyped in a bunch of ways using models and controllers in Rails. If I'm the one to do the a Java Solr-recommender query API it will be after experimenting a bit. Can someone introduce me to Ellen and Tim? On Sep 28, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: The one large-ish feature that I think would find general use would be a high performance classifier trainer. Flor cleanup sort of thing it would be good to fully integrate the streaming k-means into the normal clustering commands while revamping the command line API. Dmitriy's recent scala work would help quite a bit before 1.0. Not sure it can make 0.9. For recommendations, I think that the demo system that pat started with the elaborations by Ellen an Tim would be very good to have. I would be happy to collaborate with somebody on these but am not at all likely to have time to actually do them end to end. Sent from my iPhone On Sep 28, 2013, at 12:40, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote: > Moving closer to 1.0, removing cruft, etc. Do we have any more major > features planned for 1.0? I think we said during 0.8 that we would try to > follow pretty quickly w/ another release. > > -Grant > > On Sep 28, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sounds right in principle but perhaps a bit soon. >> >> What would define the release? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Sep 27, 2013, at 7:48, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Anyone interested in thinking about 0.9 in the early Nov. time frame? >>> >>> -Grant > > -------------------------------------------- > Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers > http://www.lucidworks.com > > > > >
