Karl, you are right. this is one of the ways i originally used this thing.
i've done some relevance experiments along these lines (some summary results here http://www.slideshare.net/otisg/finite-state-queries-in-lucene). in this case i compared 3 cases: index-time porter stemming, index-time plural stemming, and query-time plural stemming (with automaton). in general you can get similar results, slower query speed, but more flexibility. for instance, you could have a queryparser that implements a stem() operator without indexing everything twice. probably pretty boring for most people, but in some cases (e.g. lots of languages) query-time starts to become more attractive... On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:18 PM, <karl.wri...@nokia.com> wrote: > Folks, > > I had an interesting conversation with Simon a few weeks back. It occurred > to me that it might be possible to build an automata that handles stemming > and pluralization on searches. Just a thought… > > Karl > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
