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 06:19:19 GMT
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
>
>

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