[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1302?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12603927#action_12603927
]
Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-1302:
--------------------------------------
I'd like to have Explanation.isMatch() returning true mean that Scorer.next()
or Scorer.skipTo() returned true for the explained document score, and to have
the Scorer.score() value completely independent of that.
The javadocs in of the Scorers in the core trunk are consistent about using
'match' this way.
Also, I think there are currently no more backward compatibility issues for
this.
> explain should not mask negative scores
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1302
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1302
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Query/Scoring
> Reporter: Doron Cohen
> Assignee: Doron Cohen
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.4
>
> Attachments: lucene-1302-explain-negative.patch
>
>
> Explanation.isMatch() returns false for 0 or negative scores.
> Hence negative scores are omitted from the explanation.
> This causes, when using e.g. BoostingTermQuery with negative boosts, a
> difference between the collected doc score and the score shown by explain().
> A word on the usage of this - BTQ with negative boosts is useful for
> "punishing" documents for containing a term. It also allows all sorts of
> tricks with multiplying query boost by the BTQ boost, so you get a positive
> score if both boosts have the same sign but negative otherwise. - I am sure
> there other uses as well.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
