Extractors are exactly as good as the data you have to train or configure them with. An open source extractor platform may still require you to come up with a rather large heap of data from somewhere.
Not all the vendors of extractors lose money. How useful NEE is for search is an ongoing question that depends on what sort of data you are working with and what sort of precision challenges most concern you. On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Walter Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Verity sold a lot of features based on "we might need it at some point." > Very few people deployed the advanced features. They just didn't need them. > > wunder > > On 10/27/08 9:27 AM, "Charlie Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Yeah, when they first mentioned it, my initial thought was "cool, but we >> don't >> need it." However, some of the higher ups in the company are saying we might >> want it at some point, so I've been asked to look into it. I'll be sure to >> let >> them know about the flaws in the concept, thanks for that info. >> >> ____________________________________________ >> Charlie Jackson >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Walter Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 11:17 AM >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Entity extraction? >> >> The vendor mentioned entity extraction, but that doesn't mean you need it. >> Entity extraction is a pretty specific technology, and it has been a >> money-losing product at many companies for many years, going back to >> Xerox ThingFinder well over ten years ago. >> >> My guess is that very few people really need entity extraction. >> >> Using EE for automatic taxonomy generation is even harder to get right. >> At best, that is a way to get a starter set of categories that you can >> edit. You will not get a production quality taxonomy automatically. >> >> wunder >> >> On 10/27/08 8:31 AM, "Charlie Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> True, though I may be able to convince the powers that be that it's worth >>> the >>> investment. >>> >>> There are a number of open source or free tools listed on the Wikipedia >>> entry >>> for entity extraction >>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Named_entity_recognition#Open_source_or_free) >>> -- >>> does anyone have any experience with any of these? >>> >>> ____________________________________________ >>> Charlie Jackson >>> 312-873-6537 >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 10:23 AM >>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: Entity extraction? >>> >>> For the record, LingPipe is not free. It's good, but it's not free. >>> >>> >>> Otis >>> -- >>> Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Rafael Rossini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >>>> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 6:08:14 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Entity extraction? >>>> >>>> Solr can do a simple facet seach like FAST, but the entity extraction >>>> demands other tecnologies. I do not know how FAST does it but at the >>>> company >>>> I´m working on (www.cortex-intelligence.com), we use a mix of statistical >>>> and language-specific tasks to recognize and categorize entities in the >>>> text. Ling Pipe is another tool (free) that does that too. In case you >>>> would >>>> like to see a simple demo: http://www.cortex-intelligence.com/tech/ >>>> >>>> Rossini >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Charlie Jackson >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> During a recent sales pitch to my company by FAST, they mentioned entity >>>>> extraction. I'd never heard of it before, but they described it as >>>>> basically recognizing people/places/things in documents being indexed >>>>> and then being able to do faceting on this data at query time. Does >>>>> anything like this already exist in SOLR? If not, I'm not opposed to >>>>> developing it myself, but I could use some pointers on where to start. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> - Charlie >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > >
