On Sunday 06 February 2005 10:14, Kelvin Tan wrote: > Wouldn't it be great if we can form a study-group of Lucene folks who want to take the "next step"? I feel uneasy posting non-Lucene specific questions to dev or user even if its related to IR. > > Feels to me like there could be a couple like us, who didn't do a dissertation in IR, but would like a more indepth knowledge for practical purposes. Basically, the end result is that we are able to tune or extend lucene by using the Expert api (classes marked as Expert). Perhaps a possible outcome is a tuning tutorial for advanced users who already know how to use Lucene. > > What do you think? >
I learned a lot by adding some javadocs to such classes. I suppose Doug added the Expert markings, but I don't know their precise purpose. Tuning the scoring is difficult because one needs to avoid the trap of optimizing for the test collection and test queries at hand. The interplays between query structure, coord(), idf() and tf() add to the complexity. As long as the discussion is on possible additions/improvements /tunings/extensions to Lucene, I think lucene-dev is a good platform. For example, there is some code in bugzilla for variations on idf(): http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32942 and tf(): http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31784 and the MultiFieldQuery things are here: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32674 > k > > On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 22:10:26 -0800 (PST), Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > > Exactly. Luckily, since then I've learned a bit from lucene-dev > > discussions and side IR readings, so some of the topics are making > > more sense now. One could collect and annotate more references here: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-lucene/InformationRetrieval Regards, Paul Elschot --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
