I see okay, thank you.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Alessandro Benedetti wrote:
> I see,
> According to what I know it is not possible to run for the same field
> different query time analysis.
>
> Not sure if anyone was working on that.
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> -
> ---
> Alessan
I see,
According to what I know it is not possible to run for the same field
different query time analysis.
Not sure if anyone was working on that.
Regards
-
---
Alessandro Benedetti
Search Consultant, R&D Software Engineer, Director
Sease Ltd. - www.sease.io
--
Sent from: http
So, I would end up with ~6 copy fields with ~8 synonym files so that would
be about 48 field/synonym combination. Would that be a significant in terms
of index size. What would be the best way to measure this?
Custom parser:
This would take the file name, field to run the analysis on. This field
n
So, I would end up with ~6 copy fields with ~8 synonym files so that would
be about 48 field/synonym combination. Would that be a significant in terms
of index size. I guess that depends on the thesaurus size, what would be
the best way to measure this?
Custom parser:
This would take the file name
"I can go with the "title" field and have that include the synonyms in
analysis. Only problem is that the number of fields and number of synonyms
files are quite a lot (~ 8 synonyms files) due to different weightage and
type of expansion (exact vs partial) based on these. Hence going with this
Thank you, Alessandro,
I was trying these options before replying.
Yes, I am looking to generate a score for a query with synonym expansion
(not binary feature)
I can go with the "title" field and have that include the synonyms in
analysis. Only problem is that the number of fields and number of
In the end a feature will just be a numerical value.
How do you plan to use synonyms in a field to generate a numerical feature ?
Are you planning to define a binary feature for a field, in case there is a
match on the synonyms ?
Or a feature which contains a score for a query ( with synonyms expa