yes, scores are important to me too even when the results aren't sorted by score.
jamie --- Terry Steichen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When you use the new sorting features, the relevance > scores get messed up. > (A recent test showed most scores now range up to > 3.0 or so.) As Tim > suggests below, I'd like to know if fixing this is > important to others. (It > definitely is to me.) If so, I'll submit it as a > bug. > > Regards, > > Terry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Terry Steichen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 11:38 AM > Subject: Re: cvs commit: > jakarta-lucene/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search > FieldSortedHitQueue.java > > > > Terry, > > > > Yes - that's correct - it's quite possible the > scores will have values > > greater than 1.0 when sorted. It's something that > was just kind of > > ignored, figuring that when the results are sorted > by something other > > than score, having normalized scores probably > isn't so important. > > > > If it's a concern, please feel free to raise it on > the dev list. > > > > Tim > > > > > > > I've looked more closely at the Sorting code and > have a concern but I'm > not > > > smart enough to tell whether it's real or not. > > > > > > When the Hits class collects returned hits, it > then normalizes the > score. > > > However, in doing this, it assumes that the > returned hits (in the form > of a > > > TopDocs class) are ordered by score. So it > takes first item (index of 0 > in > > > the array) in the returned hits and uses this as > the normalization > factor. > > > > > > When you introduce the sorting, what the Hits > class gets back is not > > > TopDocs, but TopFieldDocs, which has already > been sorted in some order > other > > > than score. Hence, the built-in assumption of > Hits (that the first > document > > > in the array is the highest score and > appropriate to use for > normalization) > > > no longer holds. Consequently the normalization > will be anything but > > > normalized. > > > > > > Again, I emphasize my technical limitations, but > does this make sense to > > > you? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Terry > > > > > > PS: BTW, it appears that, if I compile your code > under 1.4, it runs just > > > fine under 1.3.1 (providing the regex lib > references are removed, as per > > > your patch). > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
