tter approach is to do this automatically for the searcher: to
note "bay of pigs" results have a high but not total correlation with
results assigned LCSH's "Cuba -- History -- Invasion, 1961", and I guess
that's one of the attractions of searching on Google: that we take this
type
of
search by LCSH or exploring using LCSH rather than the provided search
terms may trigger some more experiments.
Kent Fitch
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:11 AM, Mark Watkins <m...@thehawaiiproject.com>
wrote:
> :)
>
> sounds like there is a lot of useful metadata but somewhat scattere
Hi Chris,
Gremlin is the only Tinkerpop technology we've used so far.
Re the boosting, we've ended up storing the document boost as a neo4j
property on the node, and post-processing the hit list from lucene to get
each node and combine the lucene score with the boost to determine our
final
as normal as sql
But so far, neo4j seems fast and robust, and we're optimistic!
Kent Fitch
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Chris Fitzpatrick
chrisfitz...@gmail.com wrote:
Hej hej,
Is anyone is using neo4j in their library projects.
If the answer is ja, I would be very interested in hearing
to be part of the Google Search
Results; or (b) modify, replace or otherwise disable the functioning
of links to Google or third party websites provided in the Google
Search Results.
Regards,
Kent Fitch
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Jonathan Rochkind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is interesting
to be forwarding requests for real clients
behind a NAT barrier.
But they may well investigate such cases and configure their traffic
monitoring software for known legitimate proxies.
Kent Fitch
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 3:29 AM, Joe Hourcle
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Jonathan Rochkind
