Hi Walt, AFAIK there is no flag guiding scorers to "ignore norms". I guess you could hack a "all norms are 1" behavior by writing something similar to OneNormsReader in org.apache.lucene.demo.SearchFiles.
Doron Walt Stoneburner wrote on 01/06/2007 13:45:26: > I've managed to build my own Similarity class, plug it in, and use > Explain to convince myself that I am, indeed, getting the correct > weightings that I desire. My test case documents are yielding > precisely the intermediate values needed for alternate scoring. > > There's just one thing... > > When I do an .explain(), I'm getting values back for the fieldNorm() > that are improperly biasing my scores. > > According to http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > apache.org/msg06275.html, > this value is actually computed at index time. > > Indeed, that is the case, for if I generate a new index using my > custom Similarity class, the bias disappears and all is right with the > world. > > However, I'm not exactly thrilled at the prospect of maintaining a > second index. Recall from the initial message that users will be > toggling between the standard scoring and the alternative. > > And while, yes, I know that this value is precomputed and stored in > the index, what I'd like to be able to do is simply ignore it. > > Somewhere the code that computes that big huge scoring equation has to > pull that value and use it. I figure if I override -that-, I can > simply ignore the value and treat fieldNorm() as 1 when the custom > version is used. > > Only problem is, I'm not sure if this is a property set somewhere, a > method override in a replacement class, or some more brain surgery on > my one-off version of Lucene. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
