Hi Steven,
Thanks for your reply.
I tried out your approach and the problem got solved to an extent but still it remains.
The problem is the score reduces quite a bit even now as bc is not found in the combinations
( bc,cd) ( bc,ef) and ( ab,bc,cd,ef) etc.
The boosting infact has a negative impact and reduces the score further :(
The factor which is affected by boosting is the queryNorm .
With a boost of 6 
0.015559823 = (MATCH) max of:
0.015559823 = (MATCH) weight(spanNear([SearchField:cd, SearchField:ef], 10, false)^6.0 in
0), product of:
0.07606166 = queryWeight(spanNear([SearchField:cd, SearchField:ef], 10, false)^6.0), product
of:
6.0 = boost
0.61370564 = idf(SearchField: cd=1 ef=1)
0.02065639 = queryNorm
0.20456855 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(SearchField:spanNear([cd, ef], 10, false)^6.0 in 0),
product of:
0.33333334 = tf(phraseFreq=0.33333334)
0.61370564 = idf(SearchField: cd=1 ef=1)
1.0 = fieldNorm(field=SearchField, doc=0)
Without a boost 
0.07779912 = (MATCH) max of:
0.07779912 = (MATCH) weight(spanNear([SearchField:cd, SearchField:ef], 10, false) in 0),
product of:
0.3803083 = queryWeight(spanNear([SearchField:cd, SearchField:ef], 10, false)), product
of:
0.61370564 = idf(SearchField: cd=1 ef=1)
0.6196917 = queryNorm
0.20456855 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(SearchField:spanNear([cd, ef], 10, false) in 0), product
of:
0.33333334 = tf(phraseFreq=0.33333334)
0.61370564 = idf(SearchField: cd=1 ef=1)
1.0 = fieldNorm(field=SearchField, doc=0)
Regards,
Radha
Original Message
From: Steven A Rowe [mailto:sarowe@syr.edu]
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 10:35 PM
To: javauser@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Need help : SpanNearQuery
Hi Radha,
On 4/16/2009 at 8:35 AM, Radhalakshmi Sredharan wrote:
> I have a question related to SpanNearQuery.
>
> I need a hit even if there are 2/3 terms found with the span being
> applied for those 2 terms.
>
> Is there any custom implementation in place for this? I checked
> SrndQuery but that also doesn't work.
>
> This is my workaround currently:
>
> 1) For a list of terms ( ab,bc, cd,ef) , make a set like ( ab,bc)
> , ( bc,cd) ( ab,cd) (bc,ef) ( ab,bc,cd) ( ab,bc,cd,ef)..... and so on.
>
> 2) Create a spanNearQuery for each of these terms
>
> 3) Add it to the booleanQuery with a SHOULD clause.
>
> However this approach gives me puzzling scores
> eg If my document has only ( ab,bc,cd) the penalty for the missing ef
> is very high and my score comes down quite a bit.
Do you know about the scoring documentation on the Lucene site: <http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_1/scoring.html>
? In particular, see the link from there to the Searcher.explain() javadocs  this functionality
will help you understand what's happening with your queries.
I suspect that the penalty is due to fewer subqueries matching; that is, not only does (ab,bc,cd,ef)
fail to match, but (ab,bc,ef), (ab,cd,ef), (ab,ef) etc. also fail to match, and since all
of these contribute to the final score, you will see a large drop off if you don't get a full
match.
Instead of putting all of the alternatives together in a single large disjunction, if you
package them such that the shorter alternatives don't influence the final score when larger
ones match, you may get something more like what you want. I think DisjunctionMaxQuery <http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_1/api/org/apache/lucene/search/DisjunctionMaxQuery.html>,
along with judicious boosting, will do the trick, e.g.:
DMQ((ab,bc,cd,ef)^100,
((ab,bc,cd)^10 (ab,bc,ef)^10 (ab,cd,ef)^10 ...),
((ab,bc) (ab,cd) (ab,ef) ...))
Steve

To unsubscribe, email: javauserunsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, email: javauserhelp@lucene.apache.org
**************** CAUTION  Disclaimer *****************
This email contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely
for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please
notify the sender by email and delete the original message. Further, you are not
to copy, disclose, or distribute this email or its contents to any other person and
any such actions are unlawful. This email may contain viruses. Infosys has taken
every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage
you may sustain as a result of any virus in this email. You should carry out your
own virus checks before opening the email or attachment. Infosys reserves the
right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this email
address. Messages sent to or from this email address may be stored on the
Infosys email system.
***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS***

To unsubscribe, email: javauserunsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, email: javauserhelp@lucene.apache.org
