If your stemmer worked on indexing, then won't the "breath" entry automatically pick up all of these? So, isn't the project unnecessary and otiose?
On 5/31/05, Daniel Naber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 30 May 2005 18:54, Andrew Boyd wrote: > > > Now that the QueryParser knows about position increments has anyone > > used this to do stemming at query time and not at indexing time? I > > suppose one would need a reverse stemmer. Given the query breath it > > would need to inject breathe, breathes, breathing etc. > > There are two things to consider: queries will get more complicated and > thus slower and the implementation isn't that easy: while stemming can be > done with a simple algorithm (for English), you'll need a dictionary with > at least part-of-speech information for adding suffixes. That's because > you cannot just add "ing" to any word, otherwise you'd end up with car + > ing = caring. (But once you have this dictionary the quality of your > solution can be better than that of a stemmer, as stemmers also suffer > form over-stemming, i.e. mapping two non-related words to the same form). > > Regards > Daniel > > -- > http://www.danielnaber.de > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- No one ever went blind looking at the bright side of life. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
