lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "J. Delgado" <joaquin.delg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Indexing Boolean Expressions
Date Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:22:16 GMT
I guess ElasticSearch went ahead of SOLR with the percolate API, which is
exactly what is needed for two-way constraint+doc matching problem present
in Advertising systems and other use cases:

http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/api/percolate.html

Cheers,

Joaquin Delgado, PhD.
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/profile/0/04b/277

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Walter Underwood <wunder@wunderwood.org>wrote:

> Efficient rule matching goes further back, at least to "alerting" in
> Verity K2.
>
> wunder
> Search Guy, Chegg
>
> On Mar 26, 2012, at 10:15 AM, J. Delgado wrote:
>
> BTW, the idea of indexing Boolean Expressions inside a text indexing
> engine is not new. For example Oracle Text provides the CTXRULE index and
> the MATCHES operator within their indexing stack, which is primarily used
> for Rule-based text classification.
>
> See:
>
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/text.111/b28303/query.htm#autoId8
>
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/text.111/b28303/classify.htm#g1011013
>
> -- J
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:07 AM, J. Delgado <joaquin.delgado@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> In full dislosure, there is a patent application that Yahoo! has filed
>> for the use of inverted indexes for using complex  predicates for matching
>> contracts and opportunities in advertising:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/patents/US20110016109?printsec=abstract#v=onepage&q&f=false
>>
>> However I believe there are many more applications that can benefit from
>> similar matching techniques (i.e. recommender systems,
>> e-commerce, recruiting,etc) to make it worthwhile implementing the ideas
>> exposed in the original VLDB'09 paper (which is public) in Lucene.
>>
>> As a Yahoo! employee, I might not be able to directly contribute to this
>> project but will be happy to point to any publicly available pointer that
>> can help.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -- Joaquin
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Mikhail Khludnev <
>> mkhludnev@griddynamics.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Joaquin,
>>>
>>> I looked through the paper several times, and see no problem to
>>> implement it in Lucene (the trivial case at least):
>>>
>>> Let's index conjunctive condition as
>>>  {fieldA:valA,fieldB:valB,fieldC:valC,numClauses:3}
>>>
>>> then, form query from the incoming fact (event):
>>> fieldA:valA OR fieldB:valB OR fieldC:valC OR fieldD:valD
>>>
>>> to enforce overlap between condition and event, wrap the query above
>>> into own query whose scorer will check that numClauses for the matched doc
>>> is equal to number of matched clauses.
>>> To get "numClauses for the matched doc" you can use FieldCache that's
>>> damn fast; and "number of matched clauses" can be obtained from
>>> DisjunctionSumScorer.nrMatchers()
>>>
>>> Negative clauses, and multivalue can be covered also, I believe.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:05 PM, J. Delgado <joaquin.delgado@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I looked at LUCENE-2987 and its work on the query side (changes to the
>>>> accepted syntax to accept lower case 'or' and 'and'), which isn't really
>>>> related to my proposal.
>>>>
>>>> What I'm proposing is to be able to index complex boolean expressions
>>>> using Lucene. This can be viewed as the opposite of the regular search
>>>> task. The objective here is find a set of relevant queries given a document
>>>> (assignment of values to fields).
>>>>
>>>> This by itself may not sound that interesting but its a key piece
>>>> to efficiently implementing any MATCHING system which is effectively a
>>>> two-way search where constraints are defined both-ways. An example of this
>>>> would be:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Job matching: Potential employers define their "job posting" as a
>>>> documents along with complex boolean expressions used to narrow potential
>>>> candidates. Job searchers upload their "profile" and may formulate complex
>>>> queries when executing a search. Once a is search initiated from any of the
>>>> sides constraints need to satisfied both ways.
>>>> 2) Advertising: Publishers define constraints on the type of
>>>> advertisers/ads they are willing to show in their sites. On the other hand,
>>>> advertisers define constraints (typically at the campaign level) on
>>>> publisher sites they want their ads to show at as well as on the user
>>>> audiences they are targeting to. While some attribute values are known at
>>>> definition time, others are only instantiated once the user visits a given
>>>> page which triggers a matching request that must be satisfied in
>>>> few milliseconds to select "valid" ads and then scored based on "relevance".
>>>>
>>>> So in a matching system a MATCH QUERY is considered to to be a tuple
>>>> that consists of a value assignment to attributes/fields (doc) + a boolean
>>>> expression (query) that goes against a double index also built on tuples
>>>> that  simultaneously boolean expressions and associated documents.
>>>>
>>>> To do this efficiently we need to be able to build indexes on Boolean
>>>> expressions (Lucene queries) and retrieve the set of matching expressions
>>>> given a doc (typically few attributes with values assigned), which is the
>>>> core of what is described in this paper: "Indexing Boolean Expressions"
>>>> (See http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/2/vldb09-83.pdf)
>>>>
>>>> -- J
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So to effectively resolve the problem of realtime matching one can
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Joe Cabrera <calcmaster16@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  On 02/21/2012 12:15 PM, Aayush Kothari wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>  So if Aayush Kothari is interested in working on this as a Student,
>>>>>> all we need is a formal mentor (I can be the informal one).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Anyone up for the task?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Completely interested in working for and learning about the
>>>>> aforementioned subject/project. +1.
>>>>>
>>>>> This may be related to the work I'm doing with LUCENE-2987
>>>>> Basically changing the grammar to accepts conjunctions AND and OR in
>>>>> the query text.
>>>>> I would be interested in working with you on some of the details.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I too am not a formal committer.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Joe Cabreraeminorlabs.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sincerely yours
>>> Mikhail Khludnev
>>> Lucid Certified
>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Developer
>>> Grid Dynamics
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message