Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B4087DF56 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:09:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 1774 invoked by uid 500); 14 Sep 2012 13:09:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 1702 invoked by uid 500); 14 Sep 2012 13:09:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 1667 invoked by uid 99); 14 Sep 2012 13:09:07 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas.apache.org) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:09:07 +0000 Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 00:09:07 +1100 (NCT) From: "Chris Male (JIRA)" To: dev@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: <2028086341.80100.1347628147681.JavaMail.jiratomcat@arcas> In-Reply-To: <1904039517.29367.1341940594974.JavaMail.jiratomcat@issues-vm> Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4208) Spatial distance relevancy should use score of 1/distance MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4208?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13455768#comment-13455768 ] Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4208: ------------------------------------ Things are looking pretty good, we're almost there. - Where are we on multi-valued fields? In the documentation on makeDistanceValueSource it doesn't say what happens when multiple values are indexed. Do we support that in the ValueSource implementations? is the behaviour undefined? If it is supposed to be defined, can we document it? - "Returns a ValueSource useful as a score" Can we drop this claim? Part of the reason we've moved to having ConstantScoreQuerys is that it isn't clear what the score for the queries should be. This value isn't useful for every spatial operation or implementation. Once these have gotten addressed, I'm +1 for committing. > Spatial distance relevancy should use score of 1/distance > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-4208 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4208 > Project: Lucene - Core > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: modules/spatial > Reporter: David Smiley > Fix For: 4.0 > > Attachments: LUCENE-4208_makeQuery_return_ConstantScoreQuery_and_remake_TwoDoublesStrategy.patch, LUCENE-4208_makeQuery_return_ConstantScoreQuery,_standardize_makeDistanceValueSource_behav.patch, LUCENE-4208_makeQuery_return_ConstantScoreQuery,_standardize_makeDistanceValueSource_behav.patch > > > The SpatialStrategy.makeQuery() at the moment uses the distance as the score (although some strategies -- TwoDoubles if I recall might not do anything which would be a bug). The distance is a poor value to use as the score because the score should be related to relevancy, and the distance itself is inversely related to that. A score of 1/distance would be nice. Another alternative is earthCircumference/2 - distance, although I like 1/distance better. Maybe use a different constant than 1. > Credit: this is Chris Male's idea. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org