>
> Hello,
>
> I use lucene 3.6 and i try to use fuzzy queries so that I can match much
> more results.
>
> I am adding for example these strings:
>
> list.add("string matching");
>
> list.add("string123 matching");
>
> list.add
t;
>> I use lucene 3.6 and i try to use fuzzy queries so that I can match much
>> more results.
>>
>> I am adding for example these strings:
>>
>> list.add("string matching");
>>
>> list.add("string123 matching");
>>
>>
y: Match a document if EITHER term matches. So, if
NEITHER matches (within an editing distance of 2), the document is not a
match.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Pierre Antoine DuBoDeNa
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 12:52 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: fuz
ally: Match a document if EITHER term matches. So, if
> NEITHER matches (within an editing distance of 2), the document is not a
> match.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> -Original Message- From: Pierre Antoine DuBoDeNa
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 12:52 PM
> To: java-use
h an
>> editing distance of 2 or less.
>>
>> Your query is essentially: Match a document if EITHER term matches. So,
>> if NEITHER matches (within an editing distance of 2), the document is not a
>> match.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> -Ori
Hi,
I am new with Lucene.
I dont understand how Lucene works in some cases. For example:
If I have an index with the following three entries:
- ATUAÇÃO FALHA DE DISJUNTOR
- RESET DE FALHA DE DISJUNTOR
- FALHA DE COMANDO
When I try to look for something limilar with "FALHA DE DI
: When I try to look for something limilar with "FALHA DE DISJUNTOR", I've
: got the following results:
: Result | score
: FALHA DE COMANDO | 0.9277342
: ATUAÇÃO FALHA DE DISJUNTOR | 0.8880876
: RESET DE FALHA DE DISJUNTOR | 0.5709133
your best bet to make sense of scoring i
this seems wrong because this still seem
relevent, and more problematically the fuzzy query scores are so much
lower than normal
and phrase matches, so it doesn't seem to work when using fuzzy queries
mixed in with other queries, is there a better option or even some
better documentat
or
field/norm of the matching document this seems wrong because this
still seem relevent, and more problematically the fuzzy query scores
are so much lower than normal
and phrase matches, so it doesn't seem to work when using fuzzy
queries mixed in with other queries, is there a better o
Hello,
I'm interested in getting FastSSFuzzy into Lucene, perhaps as a contrib
module. One question is how much would the index grow? We've got a list of
people's names we want to do spellchecking on for example.
-J
Hi!
I search an 1.5 gig index and fuzzy queries are really slow; something like
avg. ~500ms (IndexSearcher.search(Query, HitCollector)).
When performing exact queries I archieve response times <25ms. What is it that
makes fuzzy queries so slow? Increased index access due to more terms,
Do you have a reference paper/link on it? Sounds interesting.
On Jan 5, 2009, at 8:17 PM, Jason Rutherglen wrote:
Hello,
I'm interested in getting FastSSFuzzy into Lucene, perhaps as a
contrib
module. One question is how much would the index grow? We've got a
list of
people's names we
hi,
although i've been trying to get my code into shape to upload to jira
(holidays got in the way a bit), I guess i think there might be some issues
making my implementation work for general use.
i based my design on certain assumptions, such as the fact I don't update
indexes. once my index is
hi,
yes, the results that come back from the lucene index i verify at runtime
before expanding the query. i considered trying to store delete positions as
payloads or something but fastssWC is good enough for me.
i'll see about posting my code today.
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:52 AM, Thomas Bocek
- Fast Similarity Search in Large Dictionaries. http://fastss.csg.uzh.ch/
- Paper: Fast Similarity Search in Large Dictionaries.
http://fastss.csg.uzh.ch/ifi-2007.02.pdf
- FastSimilarSearch.java http://fastss.csg.uzh.ch/FastSimilarSearch.java
- Paper: Fast Similarity Search in Peer-to-Peer Networks
this word as a
synonym.
M.
Le 24 nov. 07 à 17:36, Timo Nentwig a écrit :
Hi!
I search an 1.5 gig index and fuzzy queries are really slow;
something like
avg. ~500ms (IndexSearcher.search(Query, HitCollector)).
When performing exact queries I archieve response times <25ms. What
is i
The added IO is one factor. Another is the CPU load from doing many
edit-distance comparisons between index terms and the provided search
term. You can limit the number of edit distance comparisons conducted by
setting the minimum prefix length. This is a property of the QueryParser
if parsing
On Saturday 24 November 2007 18:28:48 markharw00d wrote:
> The added IO is one factor. Another is the CPU load from doing many
> edit-distance comparisons between index terms and the provided search
You mean FuzzyQuery.rewrite(). Are you sure this is a CPU and not an IO issue
(reading the terms f
eed my favourite option however so
far I don't know how to do it (in my case). Are there some examples to look
at?
I think one of the problem with a fuzzy queries is that it searches for all
terms that match the given levenstein distance. I doesn't care whether a
particular term
On Saturday 24 November 2007 18:28:48 markharw00d wrote:
> term. You can limit the number of edit distance comparisons conducted by
> setting the minimum prefix length. This is a property of the QueryParser
Well, javadoc: "prefixLength - length of common (non-fuzzy) prefix". So, this
is some kind
For "fuzzy" you're going to pay one way or another.
You can use ngram analyzers on indexed content and queries which will
add IO costs ("files" becomes "fi","fil", "file","il","ile","iles" in
both your query and index) or you can use some form of query-time edit
distance comparison on "files" a
Well, javadoc: "prefixLength - length of common (non-fuzzy) prefix".
So, this
is some kind of "wildcard fuzzy" but not real fuzzy anymore.
I understand the optimitation but right now I hardly can image a
reasonable
use-case. Who care whether the levenstein distance is a the
beginnen, middle
On Sunday 25 November 2007 11:54:15 markharw00d wrote:
> For "fuzzy" you're going to pay one way or another.
But which one is the cheapest? :)
> You can use ngram analyzers on indexed content and queries which will
> add IO costs ("files" becomes "fi","fil", "file","il","ile","iles" in
> both you
Hello,
While testing my code that integrates the Highlighter class from
org.apache.lucene.search.highlight, I found out that for wildcard and fuzzy
queries, it generates no best fragments.
Any particular reason why that is the case? Shouldn't the highlighter be able
to work just like
Hello,
While testing my code that integrates the Highlighter class from
org.apache.lucene.search.highlight, I found out that for wildcard and fuzzy
queries, it generates no best fragments.
Any particular reason why that is the case? Shouldn't the highlighter be able
to work just like
PM, Dmitry Goldenberg wrote:
Hello,
While testing my code that integrates the Highlighter class from
org.apache.lucene.search.highlight, I found out that for wildcard
and fuzzy queries, it generates no best fragments.
Any particular reason why that is the case? Shouldn't the
highli
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 12/27/2005 11:03 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wildcard and Fuzzy queries - no best fragments generated - ??
You have to _rewrite_ the Query for this to work. This, I believe,
is mentioned in the javadocs.
I think you are hijacking a thread with your r
a "..."
String result = highlighter.getBestFragments(tokenStream, text, 3,
"...");
System.out.println(result);
}
From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 12/27/2005 11:03 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subjec
ik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 12/27/2005 12:13 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wildcard and Fuzzy queries - no best fragments generated - ??
On Dec 27, 2005, at 2:34 PM, Dmitry Goldenberg wrote:
> What do you mean by _rewriting_ the query? I checked all the
>
ldcard and Fuzzy queries - no best fragments
generated - ??
On Dec 27, 2005, at 2:34 PM, Dmitry Goldenberg wrote:
What do you mean by _rewriting_ the query? I checked all the
classes in the highlighter package and did not see any mention of
having to rewrite.
From Highlighter's packa
HILLSBOROUGH"
region="NEW HAMPSHIRE" country="UNITED STATES"
Name: Marblehead Dr
Score: 28.291311
ID: 12762505
Country Code: US
Coordinates: 42.79743, -71.50919
Search Key: street="MARBLEHEAD" city="NASHUA"
municipality="HILLSBOROUGH" region="NEW HAMPSHIRE" country="UNITED STATES"
RID is two edit distances away from RIDGE , right? Should i enable
something during indexing for fuzzy queries?
Best regards
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
sues related to "internals" aren't appropriate on
"user" lists.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: sri krishna
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 12:36 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: How does lucene handle the wildcard and fuzzy queries ?
How does lu
"NEW HAMPSHIRE" country="UNITED
STATES"
Name: Hartford Ln
Score: 28.291311
ID: 9817672
Country Code: US
Coordinates: 42.78252, -71.49689
Search Key: street="HARTFORD" city="NASHUA"
municipality="HILLSBOROUGH" region="NEW HAMPSHIRE"
HILLSBOROUGH" region="NEW
> > HAMPSHIRE" country="UNITED STATES"
> >
> > Name: Pennichuck St
> > Score: 28.291311
> > ID: 8022314
> > Country Code: US
> > Coordinates: 42.79266, -71.46672
> > Search Key: street="PENNICHUCK"
...@gmail.com
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Sunday, August 4, 2019 8:41:27 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: What is edit distance 2 mean for fuzzy queries?
Hi Baris,
Terms of length 1 or 2 will sometimes not match because of how the scaled
distance between two terms is computed
35 matches
Mail list logo
