Hi Yonik,
Thanks for the quick response.
At 07:45 AM 12/28/2006, you wrote:
On 12/27/06, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm having a problem getting boosts to work the way I think they are
supposed to.
Do you have a specific relevance problem you are trying to solve, or
just testing things out?
Specific problem.
Frequently our users will start by specifying a facet, such a date
range, geo location, etc. At this point I don't have any positive
query terms, just constant score range queries that are used to
eliminate things the user is not interested in. So at this point,
there's nothing to be relevant to, so I need to pick some ordering.
Since I have information about which results tend to be more
interesting in the general case, I've set boosts on the documents.
I'd like to order by that, until the user gives me more information.
For an example, think of amazon ordering by "best selling", when the
user asks for books published since Dec. 1st. You don't yet know what
is relevant to this user's query, since all you have is "since Dec
1st", but you want to give an order more reasonable than "doc
number", or "date published".
What I want is for documents to be returned in doc boost order, when
all the queries are constant scoring range queries. (e.g.
date:[2006 TO 2007])
They are *constant scoring* range queries :-) Index-time boosts
currently don't factor in.
Gotcha. I think I misinterpreted an earlier post (which did say
"query boost"). I was thinking it would include index time boost, too.
I'd recommend only using index-time boosting when you can't get the
relevance you want with query boosting and scoring.
I'm not sure how I'd do it that way.
What I want (what I _think_ I want :-) is a way to specify a default
order for results, for the cases where the user has only provided
exclusion information. In this case, I'm doing a match all docs, with
filter queries.
Tom
