Oh OK. I see. So you want both the docs to have the same score? In that case, I don't think there's any other way of going about it other than writing your own custom similarity class. Maybe someone else can suggest something better.
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015, 13:08 elisabeth benoit <elisaelisael...@gmail.com> wrote: > hello, > > That's what I did, like I wrote in my mail yesterday. In first case, solr > computes max. In second case, he sums both results. > > That's why I dont get the same relative scoring between docs with the same > query. > > 2015-12-22 8:30 GMT+01:00 Binoy Dalal <binoydala...@gmail.com>: > > > Unless the content for both the docs is exactly the same it is highly > > unlikely that you will get the same score for the docs under different > > querying conditions. What you saw in the first case may have been a happy > > coincidence. > > Other than that it is very difficult to say why the scoring is different > > without getting a look at the actual query and the doc content. > > > > If you still wish to dig deeper, try to understand how solr actually > scores > > documents that match your query. It takes into account a variety of > factors > > to compute the cosine similarity to find the best match. > > You can find this formula and a decent explanation for it in the book > solr > > in action or online in the lucene docs: > > > > > https://lucene.apache.org/core/3_5_0/api/core/org/apache/lucene/search/Similarity.html > > > > On Tue, 22 Dec 2015, 11:10 elisabeth benoit <elisaelisael...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > hello, > > > > > > yes in the second case I get one document with a higher score. the > > relative > > > scoring between documents is not the same anymore. > > > > > > best regards, > > > elisabeth > > > > > > 2015-12-22 4:39 GMT+01:00 Binoy Dalal <binoydala...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > I have one query. > > > > In the second case do you get two records with the same lower scores > or > > > > just one record with a lower score and the other with a higher one? > > > > > > > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, 18:45 elisabeth benoit < > elisaelisael...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > I don't think the query is important in this case. > > > > > > > > > > After checking out solr's debug output, I dont think the query norm > > is > > > > > relevant either. > > > > > > > > > > I think the scoring changes because > > > > > > > > > > 1) in first case, I have same slop for catchall and name fields. > Bot > > > > match > > > > > pf2 pf3. In this case, solr uses max of both for scoring pf2 pf3 > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > 2) In second case, I have different slopes, then solr uses sum of > > > values > > > > > instead of max. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If anyone knows how to work around this, please let me know. > > > > > > > > > > Elisabeth > > > > > > > > > > 2015-12-21 11:22 GMT+01:00 Binoy Dalal <binoydala...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > What is your query? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, 14:37 elisabeth benoit < > > > elisaelisael...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am using solr 4.10.1 and I have configured my pf2 pf3 like > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <str name="pf2">catchall~0^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms^0.2</str> > > > > > > > <str name="pf3">catchall~0^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms^0.2</str> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my search field (qf) is my catchall field > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'v been trying to change slop in pf2, pf3 for catchall and > > > synonyms > > > > > > (going > > > > > > > from 0, or default value for synonyms, to 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pf2=catchall~1^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms~1^0.2 > > > > > > > pf3=catchall~1^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms~1^0.2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but some results are not ordered the same way anymore even if I > > get > > > > the > > > > > > > same MATCH values in debugQuery output > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For instance, for a doc matching bastill in catchall field (and > > > > nothing > > > > > > to > > > > > > > do with pf2, pf3!) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with first pf2, pf3 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0.5163083 = (MATCH) weight(catchall:bastill in 105256) > > > > > > [NoTFIDFSimilarity], > > > > > > > result of: > > > > > > > * 0.5163083 = score(doc=105256,freq=2.0 = termFreq=2.0* > > > > > > > ), product of: > > > > > > > * 0.5163083 = queryWeight,* product of: > > > > > > > 1.0 = idf(docFreq=134, maxDocs=12258543) > > > > > > > 0.5163083 = queryNorm > > > > > > > 1.0 = fieldWeight in 105256, product of: > > > > > > > 1.0 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of: > > > > > > > 2.0 = termFreq=2.0 > > > > > > > 1.0 = idf(docFreq=134, maxDocs=12258543) > > > > > > > 1.0 = fieldNorm(doc=105256) > > > > > > > 0.5163083 = (MATCH) weight(catchall:paris in 105256) > > > > > > > [NoTFIDFSimilarity], result of: > > > > > > > 0.5163083 = score(doc=105256,freq=6.0 = termFreq=6.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when I change pf2 pf3 (the only change, same query, same > > docs) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0.47504464 = (MATCH) weight(catchall:paris in 105256) > > > > > > [NoTFIDFSimilarity], > > > > > > > result of: > > > > > > > * 0.47504464 = score(doc=105256,freq=6.0 = termFreq=6.0* > > > > > > > ), product of: > > > > > > > * 0.47504464 = queryWeight*, product of: > > > > > > > 1.0 = idf(docFreq=10958, maxDocs=12258543) > > > > > > > 0.47504464 = queryNorm > > > > > > > 1.0 = fieldWeight in 105256, product of: > > > > > > > 1.0 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of: > > > > > > > 6.0 = termFreq=6.0 > > > > > > > 1.0 = idf(docFreq=10958, maxDocs=12258543) > > > > > > > 1.0 = fieldNorm(doc=105256) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so in the end, with same MATCH results, in first case I get two > > > > > documents > > > > > > > with same score, and in second case, one document has a higher > > > score. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This seem very very strange. Does anyone have a clue what's > going > > > on? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > Elisabeth > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Binoy Dalal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > > > > Binoy Dalal > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Binoy Dalal > > > -- Regards, Binoy Dalal
