lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Naama Kraus <naamakr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Overriding Lucene's term weights computation
Date Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:24:44 GMT
OK, got it. Thanks Yuval.

Naama

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Yuval Feinstein <yuvalf@answers.com>wrote:

> Naama,
> AFAIK, payloads store an arbitrary byte array per position
> (see
>
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2009/08/05/getting-started-with-payloads/
> and
>
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2010/04/18/refresh-getting-started-with-payloads/
> )
> You define what you put in the payload during indexing, and how to use it
> during retrieval.
> It seems like you want to replace the default term vectors.
> Payloads are an additional mechanism, on top of the term vectors.
> This means that implementing payloads will have a memory and a run time
> cost.
> If you have no use for the original term vectors it makes more sense to
> replace them using flex indexing,
> Because the data structures and algorithms for handling term vectors are
> more near the core of Lucene.
> Hope this makes sense,
> Yuval
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Naama Kraus [mailto:naamakraus@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:19 AM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Overriding Lucene's term weights computation
>
> ok, thanks Yuval. I'll take a look.
> Could you (or anyone) please elaborate why payloads "seem like a worse fit"
> ?
>
> TX, Naama
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Yuval Feinstein <yuvalf@answers.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Naama, Maybe you could use the new flexible indexing mechanism.
> > Some information is in this lecture:
> >
> >
> http://lucene-eurocon.org/slides/Lucene-Forecast-Version-Unicode-Flex-and-Mod_Willnauer&Schindler.pdf
> > Alternatively, you may use payloads, but they seem like a worse fit.
> > Good Luck,
> > Yuval
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Naama Kraus [naamakraus@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 1:38 PM
> > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Overriding Lucene's term weights computation
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is there a way for an application to index a document along with its
> "term
> > weighted vector" (Lucene's TermFreqVector). I.e., override the term
> > frequencies computed by Lucene, with an application's computed term
> weights
> > (non frequency based) ?
> > I don't think I want to use Scorer#score() for applying score changes as
> > this one is activated at search time which won't work for me.
> >
> > Thanks for any insight,
> > Naama
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message