oups ..
2- According to the table , a new Query is created with just non zero
boost search field search2:coco^search2_boost
search4:coco^search4_boost
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:53:41 +0100, Nicolas Maisonneuve
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hmm a idea would be to create dynamically a boost table (field,
> boostvalue) in a extended version of a TermQuery depending on the
> field:
> ex: StructuredTermQuery ("search2", "coco")
>
> 1-> Update a boost table according to:
>
> * the virtual structure :
>
> > -structured index
> > search1
> > search2
> > search4
> > search3
> > search5
>
> * the fact the score is decrease with the dept :
>
> * the search field argument, here "search2"
>
> So for this exemple the table would be = (search1_boost=0,
> search2_boost=1, search3_boost=0, search4_boost=0.7)
>
> 2- According to the table , a new Query is created with just non zero
> boost search field search2:coco^search1_boost
> search4:coco^search2_boost
>
> WDYT ?
>
> other proposals more flexible, clever, faster ?
>
> nicolas maisonneuve
>
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:29:12 +0100, Nicolas Maisonneuve
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > hy everybody,
> >
> > I would like use a index with structured search field.
> >
> > - flat index (lucene type)
> > searchfield1
> > searchfield2
> > searchffield3
> > ...
>
> >
> > to allow simple extensions of some search features:
> > - the query TermQuery("search2", "coco" ) search in search2 and
> > search4 fields,
> > - The score depend of the depth where the word is found : A document
> > where "coco" is found in search4 field has a score lower than a
> > document with "coco" found in search2
> >
> > How {do with,hack} lucene to integrated easily this notion of
> > structured field ? (no fuzzy methods allow because of the
> > performance) ?
> >
> > thanks in advance,
> >
> > Nicolas Maisonneuve
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
