Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 24083 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2008 17:01:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Jun 2008 17:01:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 7345 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jun 2008 17:01:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 7181 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jun 2008 17:01:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 7171 invoked by uid 99); 10 Jun 2008 17:01:09 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:01:09 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:00:27 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82DF7234C135 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:00:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1155166489.1213117245534.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:00:45 -0700 (PDT) From: "Doron Cohen (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1302) explain should not mask negative scores In-Reply-To: <1691282330.1213103445398.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1302?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12603931#action_12603931 ] Doron Cohen commented on LUCENE-1302: ------------------------------------- I can live with BTQ printing "match" although it actually just hurt a certain doc. Is it somewhat strange for BQ to count a negative score contributer for its minNrShouldMatch condition? > explain should not mask negative scores > --------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-1302 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1302 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Query/Scoring > Reporter: Doron Cohen > Assignee: Doron Cohen > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 2.4 > > Attachments: lucene-1302-explain-negative.patch > > > Explanation.isMatch() returns false for 0 or negative scores. > Hence negative scores are omitted from the explanation. > This causes, when using e.g. BoostingTermQuery with negative boosts, a difference between the collected doc score and the score shown by explain(). > A word on the usage of this - BTQ with negative boosts is useful for "punishing" documents for containing a term. It also allows all sorts of tricks with multiplying query boost by the BTQ boost, so you get a positive score if both boosts have the same sign but negative otherwise. - I am sure there other uses as well. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org