Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 78323 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2009 14:10:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2009 14:10:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 5665 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2009 14:10:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 5604 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2009 14:10:22 -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 5595 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2009 14:10:22 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 06:10:22 -0800 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; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 14:10:20 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CF91234C4B7 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 06:09:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1849521204.1233583799576.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 06:09:59 -0800 (PST) From: "Robert Muir (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1532) File based spellcheck with doc frequencies supplied In-Reply-To: <679712465.1233338219715.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-1532?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12669605#action_12669605 ] Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1532: ------------------------------------- when you talk about hardcoding normalization, I really don't see where its unfair or even 'hardcoding' to assume a zipfian distribution in any corpus of text for incorporating the frequency weight.... I agree the specific corpus determines some of these properties but at the end of the day they all tend to have the same general distribution curve even if the specifics are different. > File based spellcheck with doc frequencies supplied > --------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-1532 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1532 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: contrib/spellchecker > Reporter: David Bowen > Priority: Minor > > The file-based spellchecker treats all words in the dictionary as equally valid, so it can suggest a very obscure word rather than a more common word which is equally close to the misspelled word that was entered. It would be very useful to have the option of supplying an integer with each word which indicates its commonness. I.e. the integer could be the document frequency in some index or set of indexes. > I've implemented a modification to the spellcheck API to support this by defining a DocFrequencyInfo interface for obtaining the doc frequency of a word, and a class which implements the interface by looking up the frequency in an index. So Lucene users can provide alternative implementations of DocFrequencyInfo. I could submit this as a patch if there is interest. Alternatively, it might be better to just extend the spellcheck API to have a way to supply the frequencies when you create a PlainTextDictionary, but that would mean storing the frequencies somewhere when building the spellcheck index, and I'm not sure how best to do that. -- 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