On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Shashi Kant wrote:
> Why do these approaches have to be mutually exclusive?
> Do a dictionary lookup, if no satisfactory match found use an
> algorithmic stemmer. Would probably save a few CPU cycles by
> algorithmic stemming iff necessary.
>
>
by the way, if you
e tolerant and made for highly
relevant search results without exact matching.
Kind regards
- Mitch
--
View this message in context:
http://n3.nabble.com/LucidWorks-Solr-tp727341p741090.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> Stemming/lematization will pretty much always improve recall at the cost of
> precision - that's nothing new. If you stem instead, are you going to want
> documents that had run and water when you searched for running water? I just
> don't s
On 4/21/10 3:22 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
Its an orthogonal issue - running will have that problem no matter what. It
doesn't affect whether a user that types running may be just as interested
in a doc that matches all of their other terms bu
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> Its an orthogonal issue - running will have that problem no matter what. It
> doesn't affect whether a user that types running may be just as interested
> in a doc that matches all of their other terms but has ran instead of
> running. Its al
IMHO, a 'stemmer' (being a specific 'thing') is exactly that. An
algorithm for stemming. A database or lexicon is not referred to as a
'stemmer'. One can perform "stemming" using a lexicon if that's their
need.
For me, its more than just stemming because some words have morphology
totally separat
On 4/21/10 2:20 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
Right - I agree they both have their strengths and weakness' - but you
usually don't get things like running->ran with stemming. Like most things,
its a tradeoff. There is always a hybrid approach as
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> Right - I agree they both have their strengths and weakness' - but you
> usually don't get things like running->ran with stemming. Like most things,
> its a tradeoff. There is always a hybrid approach as well.
>
>
I think running/ran has mor
On 4/21/10 2:02 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
I believe that's covered by morphology?
The problem is typically a morphological analyzer emits multiple solutions,
which include POS.
So morphology can tell you that "building" has two s
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> I believe that's covered by morphology?
>
>
The problem is typically a morphological analyzer emits multiple solutions,
which include POS.
So morphology can tell you that "building" has two solutions: the gerund
form which you might stem t
On 4/21/10 1:43 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
On Apr 21, 2010, at 10:30 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
But they don't usually call 'non algorithmic' stemming 'stemming'. Stemming
usually means using a simple heuristic process. When you use vocabulary and
morphology, its usually called lemmatization
On 4/21/10 1:43 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
But they don't usually call 'non algorithmic' stemming 'stemming'.
Stemming usually means using a simple heuristic process. When you use
vocabulary and morphology, its usually called lemmatization
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> But they don't usually call 'non algorithmic' stemming 'stemming'.
> Stemming usually means using a simple heuristic process. When you use
> vocabulary and morphology, its usually called lemmatization rather than
> stemming.
>
>
Lemmatizati
On Apr 21, 2010, at 10:30 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
> But they don't usually call 'non algorithmic' stemming 'stemming'. Stemming
> usually means using a simple heuristic process. When you use vocabulary and
> morphology, its usually called lemmatization rather than stemming.
>
"stemmer" is jargo
Why do these approaches have to be mutually exclusive?
Do a dictionary lookup, if no satisfactory match found use an
algorithmic stemmer. Would probably save a few CPU cycles by
algorithmic stemming iff necessary.
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> sy to look at the "faults" o
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
>
> Strictly speaking: you haven't "ditched" stemmers altogether -- you've
> ditched *algorithmic* stemmers and moved to a *dictionary* based stemmer
> -- but it's still a stemmer.
>
> (i just don't want people reading this thread to be confus
On 4/21/10 1:18 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: Regarding stemmers, I ditched them altogether a long time ago in favor
: of a dictionary of morphologies of all known words (for any given
: language). A simple lookup of any word morphology thus produces the set,
: including the correct stem.
Strictl
: Regarding stemmers, I ditched them altogether a long time ago in favor
: of a dictionary of morphologies of all known words (for any given
: language). A simple lookup of any word morphology thus produces the set,
: including the correct stem.
Strictly speaking: you haven't "ditched" stemmers a
> Andy,
>
> This will help with smooth injection of your multilingual
> documents into Solr (multilingual either in the sense of 1
> doc containing fields in multiple languages or 1 index
> containing documents in different languages):
>
> http://sematext.com/products/multilingual-indexer/inde
http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
- Original Message
> From: Andy
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Mon, April 19, 2010 8:45:40 AM
> Subject: Re: LucidWorks Solr
>
> Thanks for the explanation Mitc
itive
> >> for
> >> a given word. The idea is that he produces always the same infintive for
> >> any
> >> derivate of the word.
> >>
> >> What would be, if there is an unknown word? For example something like
> >> slang? How does your so
For example something like
>> slang? How does your solution works here? Does it scale?
>>
>> Thank you for sharing experiences. :)
>>
>> - Mitch
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://n3.nabble.com/LucidWorks-Solr-tp727341p730059.html
>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
your solution works here? Does it scale?
>
> Thank you for sharing experiences. :)
>
> - Mitch
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://n3.nabble.com/LucidWorks-Solr-tp727341p730059.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
s the application works as expected.
- Mitch
--
View this message in context:
http://n3.nabble.com/LucidWorks-Solr-tp727341p730160.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
produces always the same infintive for
> any
> derivate of the word.
>
> What would be, if there is an unknown word? For example something like
> slang? How does your solution works here? Does it scale?
>
> Thank you for sharing experiences. :)
>
> - Mitch
> --
> View t
works here? Does it scale?
Thank you for sharing experiences. :)
- Mitch
--
View this message in context:
http://n3.nabble.com/LucidWorks-Solr-tp727341p730059.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
gt; --- On Mon, 4/19/10, Darren Govoni wrote:
>
>> From: Darren Govoni
>> Subject: Re: LucidWorks Solr
>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Date: Monday, April 19, 2010, 7:39 AM
>> Regarding stemmers, I ditched them
>> altogether a long time ago in favor
&
Thanks for the tip.
Are there any publicly available dictionary of morphologies that I could use?
Or did you build your own one?
--- On Mon, 4/19/10, Darren Govoni wrote:
> From: Darren Govoni
> Subject: Re: LucidWorks Solr
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Monday, April
ded way to deal with documents in multiple languages?
--- On Mon, 4/19/10, MitchK wrote:
> From: MitchK
> Subject: Re: LucidWorks Solr
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Monday, April 19, 2010, 4:36 AM
>
> Andy, I think it is important to know what a stemmer reall
Regarding stemmers, I ditched them altogether a long time ago in favor
of a dictionary of morphologies of all known words (for any given
language). A simple lookup of any word morphology thus produces the set,
including the correct stem.
Works great. 100% of the time.
Just a tip from me.
On Mon
ntext:
http://n3.nabble.com/LucidWorks-Solr-tp727341p729110.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--- On Sun, 4/18/10, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
> Sure, but I'm biased. ;-) Hopefully, you will find it
> useful, but choose the one that best fits your needs (and
> let me know if you need help assessing that.)
>
Thanks for the explanation Grant.
WHat is the advantage of KStem over the sta
On Apr 18, 2010, at 3:53 AM, Andy wrote:
> Just wanted to know if anyone has used LucidWorks Solr.
>
> - How do you compare it to the standard Apache Solr?
We take a release of Solr. We wrap it w/ an installer, tomcat/jetty, our
reference guide, Luke, etc. We also add in an
Thanks for asking, I am interested as well in reading the response to
your questions.
Paolo
Andy wrote:
Just wanted to know if anyone has used LucidWorks Solr.
- How do you compare it to the standard Apache Solr?
- the non-blocking IO of LucidWorks Solr -- is that for networking IO or disk
Just wanted to know if anyone has used LucidWorks Solr.
- How do you compare it to the standard Apache Solr?
- the non-blocking IO of LucidWorks Solr -- is that for networking IO or disk
IO? what are its effects?
- LucidWorks website also talked about "significantly improved fac
s.
-Kevin
From: blargy
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 12:31:09 PM
Subject: Re: LucidWorks Solr
Kevin,
When you say you just included the war you mean the /packs/solr.war correct?
I see that the KStemmer is nicely packed in there but I don'
_
> From: blargy
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 11:52:17 AM
> Subject: LucidWorks Solr
>
>
> Has anyone used this?:
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/Downloads/LucidWorks-for-Solr
>
> Other than the KStemmer and installer what are
> Other than the KStemmer and installer what are the other "enhancements"
> that
> this download offers? Is it worth using over the default Solr installation?
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/LucidWorks-Solr-tp27922870p
y
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 11:52:17 AM
Subject: LucidWorks Solr
Has anyone used this?:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/Downloads/LucidWorks-for-Solr
Other than the KStemmer and installer what are the other "enhancements" that
this download offers? Is
I am using LucidWorks Solr v1.4 and I would like to compile in a search
component, however it does not seem like a very straightforward process. The
ant script in the solr directory is that of the stock solr installation
which does not compile out of the box.
Has anyone been able to successfully
40 matches
Mail list logo
