Hi,
David Spencer a écrit :
Do you plan to add expansion on other Wordnet relationships ?
Hypernyms and hyponyms would be a good start point for thesaurus-like
search, wouldn't it ?
Good point, I hadn't considered this - but how would it work -just
consider these 2 relationships "synonyms" (thus
Pierrick Brihaye wrote:
Hi,
David Spencer a écrit :
One example of expansion with the synonym boost set to 0.9 is the
query "big dog" expands to:
Interesting.
Do you plan to add expansion on other Wordnet relationships ? Hypernyms
and hyponyms would be a good start point for thesaurus-like searc
Hi,
David Spencer a écrit :
One example of expansion with the synonym boost set to 0.9 is the query
"big dog" expands to:
Interesting.
Do you plan to add expansion on other Wordnet relationships ? Hypernyms
and hyponyms would be a good start point for thesaurus-like search,
wouldn't it ?
Howeve
in WordNet, it could probably
> be used to ignore the uncommon meanings.
If you just go search CiteSeer for "WordNet", you will find the output
of every failed MS thesis experiment to improve retrieval performance
by naive applic
On Wednesday 12 January 2005 01:47, David Spencer wrote:
> Amusingly then, documents with the terms "liberal wienerwurst" match
> "big dog"! :)
There's something like frequency information in WordNet, it could probably
be used to ignore the uncommon meanings.
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.dan
#x27;s no need to upgrade WordNet for this package at least.
I added "query expansion" which takes in a simple query string and for
every term adds their synonyms. There's an optional boost parameter to
be used to "penalize" synonyms if you want to use the heuristic that the
u
Bruce Ritchie wrote:
David Spencer wrote:
Code rewritten, automagically chooses lots of defaults, lets you
override
the defs thru the static vars at the bottom or the non-static vars
also at the bottom.
I've taken the liberty to update this code to handle multiple fields
and use the new term
David Spencer wrote:
Code rewritten, automagically chooses lots of defaults, lets you override
the defs thru the static vars at the bottom or the non-static vars also
at the bottom.
I've taken the liberty to update this code to handle multiple fields and use the new term vector
support in CVS so
Bruce Ritchie wrote:
David Spencer wrote:
[c] "interesting words" - uses code from MoreLikeThis to give a table
of all interesting
words in the current "source" doc ordered by score.
Remember score is idf*tf as per Dougs mail (and as per my
hopefully correct understanding of these things). This
David Spencer wrote:
I'd appreciate if someone could proofread MoreLikeThis.like(Reader) and
mlt(Reader).
At a glance it seems to return reasonable results on my site.
One thing that I would find extremely useful is updating the code to handle multiple fields since
many (most?) indexes do not u
David Spencer wrote:
[c] "interesting words" - uses code from MoreLikeThis to give a table of
all interesting
words in the current "source" doc ordered by score.
Remember score is idf*tf as per Dougs mail (and as per my
hopefully correct understanding of these things). This page is of course
mor
Doug Cutting wrote:
David Spencer wrote:
Code rewritten, automagically chooses lots of defaults, lets you
override
the defs thru the static vars at the bottom or the non-static vars
also at the bottom.
Has anyone used this? Was it useful?
I've put it up on my "demo" site (rfc::search) in whi
David Spencer wrote:
Code rewritten, automagically chooses lots of defaults, lets you override
the defs thru the static vars at the bottom or the non-static vars also
at the bottom.
Has anyone used this? Was it useful? Should we add it to the sandbox?
Doug
-
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
Lots of params in that mlt method, but it seems flexible.
Code rewritten, automagically chooses lots of defaults, lets you
override
the defs thru the static vars at the bottom or the non-static vars also
at the bottom.
Quickest way to use, choosing all defaults i
Lots of params in that mlt method, but it seems flexible.
I'll try it.
Small optimization suggestion: use int[] with a single element for that
words Map, instead of creating lots of Integer()s. Actually, maybe
JVMs are smart and don't allocate new objects for the same int wrapped
in Integer I
Doug Cutting wrote:
Karl Koch wrote:
Do you know good papers about strategies of how
to select keywords effectivly beyond the scope of stopword lists and
stemming?
Using term frequencies of the document is not really possible since
lucene
is not providing access to a document vector, isn't it?
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 05:59:34PM +0100, Viparthi, Kiran (AFIS) wrote:
> We want to provide "did you mean" search suggestions on our search results
> pages. Most of the "did you mean" searches will be derived from synonyms,
> translations and other information from our ontology(KAON).
Just a com
We want to provide "did you mean" search suggestions on our search results
pages. Most of the "did you mean" searches will be derived from synonyms,
translations and other information from our ontology(KAON).
1. It would be nice to be able to navigate the Query object created by the
QueryParser
How do you model/store your taxonomies/ontologies regarding your
datastructure ? Do you use Java datastructures or RDF?
Cheers,
Ralf
> Hi Everybody,
>
> I wish to use an hierarchy of concept provided by an Ontology to refine
> or expand my query answer with Lucene.
> May I Know If someone have
Hi,
expanding a query is basically done by generating a new one an reusing the
existing terms plus the selected one from your ontology/taxonomy. There has
been discussion here before and you should search the archive for that.
Extracting and using the right bit from your ontology is basically a ta
Hi Everybody,
I wish to use an hierarchy of concept provided by an Ontology to refine
or expand my query answer with Lucene.
May I Know If someone have tryed it yet ?
Thanks,
Gayo
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For ad
21 matches
Mail list logo
