FYI. I did a direct integration with Carrot2 with Solrj with a separate Ajax call from UI for top 100 hits to clusters terms in the two text fields. It gots comparable performance to other facets in terms of response time.
In terms of algorithms, their listed two "Lingo" and "STC" which I don't reconize. But I think at least one of them might have used SVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_value_decomposition). -Yao Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > > > I'd call it related (their application in search encourages exploration), > but also distinct enough to never mix them up. I think your assessment > below is correct, although I'm not familiar with the details of Carrot2 > any more (was once), so I can't tell you exactly which algo is used under > the hood. > > Otis > -- > Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Michael Ludwig <m...@as-guides.com> >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:41:54 AM >> Subject: Re: Faceting on text fields >> >> Otis Gospodnetic schrieb: >> > >> > Solr can already cluster top N hits using Carrot2: >> > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/ClusteringComponent >> >> Would it be fair to say that clustering as detailed on the page you're >> referring to is a kind of dynamic faceting? The faceting not being done >> based on distinct values of certain fields, but on the presence (and >> frequency) of terms in one field? >> >> The main difference seems to be that with faceting, grouping criteria >> (facets) are known beforehand, while with clustering, grouping criteria >> (the significant terms which create clusters - the cluster keys) have >> yet to be determined. Is that a correct assessment? >> >> Michael Ludwig > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Faceting-on-text-fields-tp23872891p23980124.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
