Hello ,
> Could you back up a step and tell us what the upper-level
> task you're trying to accomplish is? That is, why the partner
> wants the number?
I am not sure, I was assigned to do this task. It must be related to
furthur tweaks of the result-set which is based on scores.
> The normalized score
> *is* in a fixed range already, between 0 and 1. Would it serve
> to just modify that and send it back to the partner?
But, I have got some results whose score is above 1. I do not know
whether I met your conditions (default) .
For ex..
3.0334244 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(freeTextField:england in 7083017), product of:
2.236068 = tf(termFreq(freeTextField:england)=5)
7.235139 = idf(docFreq=14539, maxDocs=7420800)
0.1875 = fieldNorm(field=freeTextField, doc=7083017)
Thanks.
On 22 February 2010 16:32, Erick Erickson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Could you back up a step and tell us what the upper-level
> task you're trying to accomplish is? That is, why the partner
> wants the number?
>
> Because the raw score in Lucene is only relevant within that
> single query, and then only for ranking. The normalized score
> *is* in a fixed range already, between 0 and 1. Would it serve
> to just modify that and send it back to the partner?
>
> Erick
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Smith G <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello ,
>> I have observed that even if we change boosting
>> drastically, scores are being normalized at the end because of
>> queryNorm value. Is there anything ( regarding to the queryNorm) that
>> we can rely on ? like score will always be under 10 or some fixed
>> value ? The main objective is to provide scores in a fixed range to
>> the partner. So have you been experienced anything like this? Is it
>> possible to do so ?.
>> Have you been experienced any strange situation like for a
>> particular query, result scores were really high compared to routine?
>> if yes,I would like to know the factor that effected scores
>> drastically, because it may help me to proceed or understand the
>> cases.
>> Thanks
>>
>> (NOTE : I am sorry, I have also posted in solr group, there were no
>> replies and also I feel this place is even more apt.).
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
