Re: Ranking issue when combining sorting and re-ranking on SolrCloud (multiple shards)

a custom sorting > > function to get the first pass results (using the sort param), and then > we > > use LTR for re-ranking. This works fine, i.e. re-ranking is applied on > the > > topN, after sorting has completed and the order is correct. > > > > However, a

Re: Ranking issue when combining sorting and re-ranking on SolrCloud (multiple shards)

solve the sorting/re-ranking issue. In the end we > migrated the custom sorting formula to using the 'q' param instead of > 'sort' to get back the results sorted by score as expected. > > That mostly solved our issues with inconsistent Solr scores. Maybe sorting > and r

Re: Ranking issue when combining sorting and re-ranking on SolrCloud (multiple shards)

Hi Dmitry, No, we were not able to solve the sorting/re-ranking issue. In the end we migrated the custom sorting formula to using the 'q' param instead of 'sort' to get back the results sorted by score as expected. That mostly solved our issues with inconsistent Solr scores.

Re: Ranking issue when combining sorting and re-ranking on SolrCloud (multiple shards)

n to get the first pass results (using the sort param), and then we > use LTR for re-ranking. This works fine, i.e. re-ranking is applied on the > topN, after sorting has completed and the order is correct. > > However, as we are migrating on SolrCloud (version 7.3.1) with multiple >

Re: Ranking issue when combining sorting and re-ranking on SolrCloud (multiple shards)

ing the sort param), and then we > use LTR for re-ranking. This works fine, i.e. re-ranking is applied on the > topN, after sorting has completed and the order is correct. > > However, as we are migrating on SolrCloud (version 7.3.1) with multiple > shards, this does not seem

Ranking issue when combining sorting and re-ranking on SolrCloud (multiple shards)

HI all, On our current master/slave setup (no cloud), we use a a custom sorting function to get the first pass results (using the sort param), and then we use LTR for re-ranking. This works fine, i.e. re-ranking is applied on the topN, after sorting has completed and the order is correct

Re: Ranking

SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 27 Jul 2019 13:55:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Erik Hatcher Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2019 16:55:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Ranking Message-Id: <9df60f32-0a60-4c0f-90c2-98

Re: Ranking

The details of the scoring can be seen by setting &debug=true Erik > On Jul 27, 2019, at 15:40, Steven White wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I have 2 files like so: > > FA has the letter "i" only 2 times, and the file size is 54,246 bytes > FB has the letter "i" 362 times and the file size

Re: Ranking

I can’t imagine this is actually true unless you have a default copy field and I is in one of them. Also the letter “I” is a bizarre test case > On Jul 27, 2019, at 3:40 PM, Steven White wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I have 2 files like so: > > FA has the letter "i" only 2 times, and the file s

Bugs with Re-ranking/LtR and ExplainAugmenterFactory

Hello, Currently, if we use the ExplainAugmenterFactory with LtR, instead of using the model/re-rankers explain method, it uses the default query explain (tf-idf explanation). This happens because the BasicResultContext doesn't wrap the query(https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/1d85cd783

Re: Re-ranking query: issue with sort criteria and how to disable it

at 1:39 PM, Andrea Gazzarini wrote: Hi Joel, many thanks for the response and sorry for this late reply. About the first question, I can open a JIRA for that. Instead, for disabling the component I think it would be useful to add - an automatic behaviour: if the sort criteria excludes the score the

Re: Re-ranking query: issue with sort criteria and how to disable it

for that. Instead, for > disabling the component I think it would be useful to add > > - an automatic behaviour: if the sort criteria excludes the score the > re-ranking could be automatically excluded > - a parameter / flag (something like *rr=true*) which enables / disables > the rerank

Re: Re-ranking query: issue with sort criteria and how to disable it

Hi Joel, many thanks for the response and sorry for this late reply. About the first question, I can open a JIRA for that. Instead, for disabling the component I think it would be useful to add - an automatic behaviour: if the sort criteria excludes the score the re-ranking could be

Re: Re-ranking query: issue with sort criteria and how to disable it

> I have a Solr 4.10.4 instance with a RequestHandler that has a re-ranking > query configured like this: > > > dismax > ... > {!boost b=someFunction() v=$q} > {!rerank reRankQuery=$rqq reRankDocs=60 > reRankWeight=1.2} >

Re-ranking query: issue with sort criteria and how to disable it

Hi guys, I have a Solr 4.10.4 instance with a RequestHandler that has a re-ranking query configured like this: dismax ... {!boost b=someFunction() v=$q} {!rerank reRankQuery=$rqq reRankDocs=60 reRankWeight=1.2} score desc

Re: Ranking based on term position

Hi Li Li, I am experiencing the same problem. can you Explain little detailed? Where do i change these methods? I am using Solr 5.0.0, And How do i query this? Is there any change while query? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Ranking-based-on-term-position-tp

Re: Ranking based on match position in field

Hi Tomas, Sorry for the confusion. That link (open issue) means that, it is a proposed and desired functionality. However it didn't included in code base yet. You could do :  * ping the author through jira and request to bring patch to trunk * vote for the issue * you could try if patch works w

Re: Ranking based on match position in field

Hi, thanks for the link. I've upgraded from the used 4.7 to the recent 4.9 version. I've tried to use the new feature with this query in the admin interface using edismax: description:Kühler^~1^5 However, the result seems to stay the same: description:Kühler~1^5 description:Kühler~1^5 (+de

Re: Ranking based on match position in field

Hi, Please see : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3925 Ahmet On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:39 PM, Thomas Michael Engelke wrote: Hi, an example. We have 2 records with this data in the same field (description): 1: Lufthutze vor Kühler Bj 62-65, DS 2: Kühler HY im Austausch, Alttei

Re: Ranking code

For the better analysis for ranking of documents, you should need to query the index with these extra parameters(in bold) eg...whole_query*&debug=true&wt=xml.* Copy that xml and and paste it to http://explain.solr.pl/ you can then easily find out the ranking alalysis in the forms of the pie charts

Re: Ranking code

On 4/8/2014 3:55 AM, azhar2007 wrote: Im basically trying to understand how results are ranked. Whats the algorithm behind it If you add a debugQuery parameter to your request, set to true, you will see the score calculation for every document included in the response. This is the default s

Re: Ranking code

Im basically trying to understand how results are ranked. Whats the algorithm behind it --- Original Message --- From: "Shawn Heisey-4 [via Lucene]" Sent: 7 April 2014 19:24 To: "azhar2007" Subject: Re: Ranking code On 4/7/2014 10:29 AM, azhar2007 wrote: > Hi does

Re: Ranking code

On 4/7/2014 10:29 AM, azhar2007 wrote: Hi does anybody know where the ranking code is held. Which file in Solr stores it the solr schema.xml or solrconfig.xml file? Your question is very generic. It needs to be more specific -- what are you actually trying to do? The generic answer is "both

Re: ranking retrieval measure

one of the measurement criteria is DCG. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discounted_cumulative_gain On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Floyd Wu wrote: > Usually IR system is measured using Precision & Recall. > But depends on what kind of system you are developing to fit what scenario. > > Take a lo

Re: ranking retrieval measure

Usually IR system is measured using Precision & Recall. But depends on what kind of system you are developing to fit what scenario. Take a look http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall 2014-04-01 10:23 GMT+08:00 azhar2007 : > Hi people. Ive developed a search engine to implement and i

Re: Re-Ranking results based on DocValues with custom function.

Got it! Just for you to share ... and maybe for inclusion in the Java API docs of ValueSource :) For sorting one needs to implement the method public double doubleVal(int) of the class ValueSource then it works like a charm. cheers, Mathias On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Chris Hostetter w

Re: Re-Ranking results based on DocValues with custom function.

: It basically allows for searching for text (which is associated to an : image) in an index and then getting the distance to a sample image : (base64 encoded byte[] array) based on one of five different low level : content based features stored as DocValues. very cool. : So there one little tin

Re: Re-Ranking results based on DocValues with custom function.

Hi! Thanks for the directions! I got it up and running with a custom ValueSourceParser: http://pastebin.com/cz1rJn4A and a custom ValueSource: http://pastebin.com/j8mhA8e0 It basically allows for searching for text (which is associated to an image) in an index and then getting the distance to a s

Re: Re-Ranking results based on DocValues with custom function.

: dissimilarity functions). What I want to do is to search using common : text search and then (optionally) re-rank using some custom function : like : : http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*&sort=myCustomFunction(var1) asc can you describe what you want your custom function to look like? it ma

Re-Ranking results based on DocValues with custom function.

t the DocValues for search is handled by a custom RequestHandler, which works great, but using text as a main search feature, and my DocValues for re-ranking, I'd rather just add a function for sorting and use the current, stable and well performing request handler. cheers, Mathias ps. a de

Re: ranking score by fields

found in field1 > But now I have problem with sort: I cant use val1, val2 in sort :(. > > And now my questions: > 1. have I posibility use my custom fields val1, val2 in sort? With > formula. Or params $q1, $q2? > 2. may be I have posibility set score by formula at qurey-time? > 3.

RE: ranking score by fields

me? 3. your variant? Thanks. Alex. -Original Message- From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 1:53 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: ranking score by fields You can sometimes use the highlighter component to do this, but it's

Re: ranking score by fields

You can sometimes use the highlighter component to do this, but it's a little tricky... But note your syntax isn't doing what you expect. (field1:apache solr) parses as field1:apache defaultfield:solr. You want field1:(apache solr) &debug=all is your friend for these kinds of things, especial

Re: Ranking by sorting score and rankingField better or by product(score, rankingField)?

Hi Chris, Thanks! Before your great suggestions, I give up using function query to calculate product of score and rankingField and using exactly the same with your boost query solution. Of course it works fine. The next step will be design suitable function to output a ranking value that also cons

Re: Ranking by sorting score and rankingField better or by product(score, rankingField)?

: But the sort=product(score, rankingField) is not working in my test. What : probably wrong? the problem is "score" is not a field or a function -- Solr doesn't know exactly what "score" you want it to use there (scores from which query?) You either need to refrence the query in the function (

Re: Ranking by sorting score and rankingField better or by product(score, rankingField)?

Thanks for the report, Floyd, the Solr Reference Guide has been changed to say the default is $SOLR_HOME/data rather than $SOLR_HOME/data/index. Currently the ExternalFileField javadoc says: S

Re: Ranking by sorting score and rankingField better or by product(score, rankingField)?

Hi Otis, There is no error in console nor in log file. I'm using Solr-4.0. The External file name is external_rankingField.txt and exist is directory "C:\solr-4.0.0\example\solr\collection1\data\external_rankingField.txt" External file should work as well because when I issue query "sort=sqrt(ra

Re: Ranking by sorting score and rankingField better or by product(score, rankingField)?

Hi, Do you see any errors? Which version of Solr? What does debugQuery=true say? Are you sure your file with ranks is being used? (remove it, put some junk in it, see if that gives an error) Otis -- Performance Monitoring - http://sematext.com/spm/index.html Search Analytics - http://sematext.com

Re: Ranking by sorting score and rankingField better or by product(score, rankingField)?

Thanks Otis, But the sort=product(score, rankingField) is not working in my test. What probably wrong? Floyd 2012/11/20 Otis Gospodnetic > Hi, > > 3. yes, you can sort by function - > http://search-lucene.com/?q=solr+sort+by+function > 2. this will sort by score only when there is a tie in ra

Re: Ranking by sorting score and rankingField better or by product(score, rankingField)?

Hi, 3. yes, you can sort by function - http://search-lucene.com/?q=solr+sort+by+function 2. this will sort by score only when there is a tie in ranking (two docs have the same rank value) 1. the reverse of 2. Otis -- Performance Monitoring - http://sematext.com/spm/index.html Search Analytics - h

Re: Ranking / Posiiton info per document

well i have been searching but still couldnt find anything about the ranking issue... anyone has any solution? - Zeki ama calismiyor... Calissa yapar... -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Ranking-Posiiton-info-per-document-tp4010415p4011121.html Sent from th

Re: Ranking / Posiiton info per document

Hello Otis, can you explain how to do that please? And what do you mean by "just ++"? - Zeki ama calismiyor... Calissa yapar... -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Ranking-Posiiton-info-per-document-tp4010415p4010664.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing l

Re: Ranking based on term position

Use SpanFirstQuery : I need to make sure that documents with the search term occurring : towards the beginning of the document are ranked higher. : : For example, : : Search term : ox : Doc 1: box fox ox : Doc 2: ox box fox : : Result: Doc2 will be ranked higher than Doc1. : : The solution I

Re: Ranking based on term position

I have considerd this problem and tried to solve it using 2 methods By these methods, we also can boost a doc by the relative positions of query terms. 1: add term Position when indexing modify TermScorer.score public float score() { assert doc != -1; int f = freqs[pointer]; floa

Re: Ranking position in solr

> I sent this command: curl http://localhost:8081/solr/update -F stream.body=' > ', but it doesn't reload. > > It doesn't reload automatically after every commit or > optimize unless I add > new document then i commit. Hmm. May be there is an easier way to force it? (add empty/dummy doc) But if y

Re: Ranking position in solr

I sent this command: curl http://localhost:8081/solr/update -F stream.body=' ', but it doesn't reload. It doesn't reload automatically after every commit or optimize unless I add new document then i commit. Any idea? On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Ahmet Arslan wrote: > > I'm using solr 1.4 a

Re: Ranking position in solr

> I'm using solr 1.4 and only one core. > The elevate xml file is quite big, and > i wonder can solr handle that? How to reload the core? Markus Jelsma's suggestion is more robust. You don't need to restart or reload anything. Put elevate.xml under data directory. It will reloaded automatically

Re: Ranking position in solr

I'm using solr 1.4 and only one core. The elevate xml file is quite big, and i wonder can solr handle that? How to reload the core? On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Ahmet Arslan wrote: > > The problem is that every time I > > update the elevate.xml, I need to restart > > solr tomcat service. Thi

Re: Ranking position in solr

> The problem is that every time I > update the elevate.xml, I need to restart > solr tomcat service. This feature needs to be updated > frequently. How would > i handle that? You can reload core, without restarting tomcat, if you are using multi-core setup. Which version of solr are you using?

Re: Ranking position in solr

No, it can build for each new searcher [1]. [1]: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/QueryElevationComponent#config-file On Tuesday 13 July 2010 11:02:10 Chamnap Chhorn wrote: > The problem is that every time I update the elevate.xml, I need to restart > solr tomcat service. This feature needs to be upd

Re: Ranking position in solr

The problem is that every time I update the elevate.xml, I need to restart solr tomcat service. This feature needs to be updated frequently. How would i handle that? Any idea or other solutions? On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Ahmet Arslan wrote: > > I wonder there is a proper way to > > fulfi

Re: Ranking position in solr

> I wonder there is a proper way to > fulfill this requirement. A book has > several keyphrases. Each keyphrase consists from one word > to 3 words. The > author could either buy keyphrase position or don't buy > position. Note: each > author could buy more than 1 keyphrase. The keyphrase > search

Re: ranking question

Consider upgrading to the 3.1 branch which gives you true sort by function http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery#Sort_By_Function -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com Training in Europe - www.solrtraining.com On 18. juni 2010, at 01.23, Chris Hostetter wr

Re: ranking question

: I want to reorder the results as per function like : sum(w0*score, w1*field1, w2*field2, w3*filed3,..) : : I am using solr1.4 and it seems it does not support sort by function. : : How can this be achieved : : I tried using : q=(query)^w0 (_val_:field1)^w1 (_val_:field2...)^w2 try fq=(query

Re: ranking question

Functions create the relevance score. Solr sorts by a function if it is part of the search string. On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Geek Gamer wrote: > Hi , > > I want to reorder the results as per function like > sum(w0*score, w1*field1, w2*field2, w3*filed3,..) > > I am using solr1.4 and it se

Re: Ranking of search results

value will i be able to i set preference for my search links?.If so how?.   Regards Bhaskar   - On Thu, 10/1/09, bhaskar chandrasekar wrote: From: bhaskar chandrasekar Subject: Re: Ranking of search results To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Date: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 7:34 PM

Re: Ranking of search results

: Re: Ranking of search results To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Date: Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 11:33 AM It depends on several things:1) The query handler that you are using 2) The fields that you are searching on and default fields specified For the default handler, it will issue a query

Re: Ranking of search results

It depends on several things:1) The query handler that you are using 2) The fields that you are searching on and default fields specified For the default handler, it will issue a query for the default field and return results accordingly. To see what is going on pass the &debugQuery=true to the e

Re: Ranking result on the basis of field value irrespective of score

Create your languages field (or a copy) in such a way that sort gives you the order you want. Then just query Solr with "sort=language asc" parameter. 2008/10/23 Amit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi All, > > > > How we can do the ranking on the basis of specific field value > irrespective > of score in

Re: ranking on Multivalued fields

- Solr - Nutch > > - Original Message > From: Umar Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2008 7:03:32 AM > Subject: Re: ranking on Multivalued fields > > Hi Otis, > > thanks for the reply, > > consid

Re: ranking on Multivalued fields

Umar, The notion of "subfield" does not exist in Solr (or am I living under a rock?). Thus, val 1 http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch - Original Message From: Umar Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2008 7:03:3

Re: ranking on Multivalued fields

What you probably want to achieve is displaying only docs in a certain category (maybe filtered) ordered by descending score in the context of exactly this category, right? Well, you could come over this by creating a category specific score field for every category following the schema "cat-X

Re: ranking on Multivalued fields

Hi Otis, thanks for the reply, consider a multivalued field name cat --other fields val 1 score2 val 3 > As for your second question, just add category:X to your query and you'll > get matches ordered/ranked by score by default. > > Otis > > > -- > Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Luce

Re: ranking on Multivalued fields

Umar, I'm not sure what you mean by a "subfield", can you explain please? As for your second question, just add category:X to your query and you'll get matches ordered/ranked by score by default. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch - Original Message Fr

Re: Ranking search results by content type

: Or you can do what I do and when you search, just weight each type : differently. My types are all just one letter, so for instance: : : q=((search string) AND type:A^1) OR ((search string) AND type:B^10) OR etc etc a simpler approach would be... q = +(search string) type:A^1 type:B^10 typ

Re: Ranking search results by content type

You could have each doctype correspond to a number that's saved in the type field, and sort by the number and then score. Or you can do what I do and when you search, just weight each type differently. My types are all just one letter, so for instance: q=((search string) AND type:A^1) OR ((searc

Re: Ranking ApacheCon proposals

On May 1, 2007, at 7:42 PM, ericp wrote: Cool, I noticed a ruby-Flare-Solr presentation too who is giving that? I proposed that one. Erik

Re: Ranking ApacheCon proposals

Cool, I noticed a ruby-Flare-Solr presentation too who is giving that? ERIC Chris Hostetter wrote: > I have no idea if they did this for the impending ApacheCon EU, but I just > noticed that for ApacheCon US, they have a "Would you attend this > session?" ranking for for people to give feedback o

Re: Ranking Question.

you need to elaborate a little more on what yo uare currently doing, and what you want to be doing... youmention "my own ranking/scoring system" ... is this something you've implemented in code already? Is this a custom Simalrity class or Query class, or something basic htat you've done with a cus