I'm not saying that calculating percentages is a bad thing *within a query*.Your absolutely right, users want some clue about how "good" a match various items are.
But trying to compare percentages (scores) between *two different queries* then trying to infer that there is some "better fit" based on that data is where problems creep in..... FWIW Erick On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Shashi Kant <shashi....@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris & Erick's arguments are persuasive , however we do live in an > imperfect world. Most of our users want to see the relative importance > of a results vis-a-vis the rest.... > > Relative Importance (%) = (d - dmin)/(dmax-dmin) * 100 > > Where dmax is the highest Lucene score (score of top result) and dmin > is the least (the score of the last result) and d = current score. > > This would work for any n results. > > While this might be technically 'meh', we took a simple normalization > approach of Lucene scores, it helped the users in gauging the relative > importance and relate better. End of day, isn't that what matters > most? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
