Doug Cutting wrote:


I have some extensions to Lucene that I've not yet commited which make it possible to easily define synthetic IndexReaders (not currently supported). So you could do things that way, once I check these in. But is this really better than just ANDing the clauses together? It would take some big experiments to know, but my guess is that it doesn't make much difference to compute a "local" IDF for such things.


In this case, I think that the operator would be evaluated as "an implication" and not "AND" (=1-(((1-q1)^p+(1-q2)^p )/2 )^(1/p)). Obviously, you have to use an filter to filter out false hits (in case of q1->q2, the formula is true when q1 is false, so it is not what you really need), but it is not an issue with the auxiliary index. On the other hand, it is a feeling and it needs a test, you are right.

Leo



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to