You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-user@lucene.apache.org by "Nathan G. Freier" <nf...@cs.washington.edu> on 2002/03/29 20:15:37 UTC
Relevance Feedback
Hello,
I'm a graduate student in the Information School at the University of
Washington. I'm currently in the process of developing a prototype
online IR system and I have been making use of Lucene's API. I'm just
beginning to plan out some mechanisms for query expansion and relevance
feedback. I haven't seen any mention of manual or automated query
expansion or user relevance feedback in the Lucene documentation or FAQs.
Does anyone have any experience with these processes in general and/or
specifically with Lucene? If so, did you have to reimplement Lucene's
Scorer to incorporate the relevance measures? Any pointers to
information on how practical this redesign would be? Will I be able to
implement query expansion and/or relevance feedback without
reconstructing some of Lucene's underlying scoring code?
Any information pointers you can give would be great.
Thanks,
Nathan
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Relevance Feedback
Posted by "Steven J. Owens" <pu...@darksleep.com>.
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 12:11:03PM -0800, Joshua O'Madadhain wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Nathan G. Freier wrote:
> > I'm just beginning to plan out some mechanisms for query expansion
> > and relevance feedback.
>
> I've also been doing research in IR using the Lucene API.
> [...]
> If you'd like to discuss this offline (since we may be getting off the
> list topic), feel free to email me.
I'm curious about this topic, although I have absolutely no
familiarity with it (beyond reading, many years ago, about the real
estate browsing UI experiment where they let users click on
inappropriate listings and refined the search based on that - a
feature I've often wished for with web search engines).
If you could either include me in the CC list, or send me a
summary, or possibly (if others are also interested), continue the
discussion here, I'd appreciate it.
Steven J. Owens
puff@darksleep.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Relevance Feedback
Posted by "Nathan G. Freier" <nf...@cs.washington.edu>.
[If this conversation is off-topic for this list, we can move it offline
but I figure since at least one other is interested I'll keep it here
for now.]
Thanks for the reply, Joshua. I'm really just beginning my studies in
IR so forgive any niavete. Please see my comments below.
>I've also been doing research in IR using the Lucene API. Regarding query
>expansion, I wrote my own code to do that, based on an algorithm I
>developed (which is a type of thesaurus-based expansion). Basically I ran
>the original query terms through the appropriate analyzers, decided what
>terms I wanted to add, and constructed my own Query from these terms
>(using TermQuery and BooleanQuery).
>
This makes sense to me. I'm looking to do something similar but add in
a final step of allowing the user to select which terms (of those that
are found to be relevant through a document relevance feedback
mechanism) to actually include in the expansion. (I'm thinking
OKAPI/Giraffe style here... I suppose it's been done elsewhere too but
Efthimis Efthimiadis is my reference point for this project.) Either
way, I can see how this is done without interacting with Lucene's
scoring/ranking code.
>
>While I did weight documents based on the terms they used (take a look at
>TermQuery.setBoost()), I didn't do relevance feedback per se. Of course,
>how you want to implement relevance feedback will depend on what mechanism
>you want to use.
>
I'm planning on implementing an array of term weighting/document ranking
algorithms such that the user can choose which algorithm to use. (The
system is for educational use so I'm trying to develop some transparency
here.) In the near future, I'd like to implement term weighting using:
(1) porter, (2) W_P-Q, (3) F4, and (4) EMIM. Each of these relies on
(user-based) relevance feedback.
Now that I look at this, I wonder if these algorithms could also be
implemented outside of the scoring. Perhaps I can request the relevance
judgments from the user, recalculate the term weights, use the
TermQuery.setBoost() method, and reiterate the search. Am I missing
something? Will the term boost function properly given the term weights
calculated by these algorithms?
>
>PS: Say hi to Wanda Pratt for me.
>
I will... I haven't had the opportunity to meet her yet. Have you
worked with her? [Off topic.. sorry.]
Nathan
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Relevance Feedback
Posted by Joshua O'Madadhain <jm...@ics.uci.edu>.
Peter:
Not as yet. The research is still ongoing, and I'm not yet convinced of
its efficacy as yet. However, once I've at least got the code into
something like a beta status (and properly commented and restructured
it) I'd be happy to contribute it.
Thanks for asking.
Joshua
jmadden@ics.uci.edu...Obscurium Per Obscurius...www.ics.uci.edu/~jmadden
Joshua Madden: Information Scientist, Musician, Philosopher-At-Tall
It's that moment of dawning comprehension that I live for--Bill Watterson
My opinions are too rational and insightful to be those of any organization.
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Peter Carlson wrote:
> Hi Joshua,
>
> Would you be willing to contribute your term expansion code?
> I think many people would find this useful, and I would like to see this
> added into the core of Lucene as a expandedTermQuery if that makes sense.
>
> Thanks
>
> --Peter
>
> On 3/29/02 12:11 PM, "Joshua O'Madadhain" <jm...@ics.uci.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> > While I did weight documents based on the terms they used (take a look at
> > TermQuery.setBoost()), I didn't do relevance feedback per se. Of course,
> > how you want to implement relevance feedback will depend on what mechanism
> > you want to use.
> >
> > If you'd like to discuss this offline (since we may be getting off the
> > list topic), feel free to email me.
> >
> > Regards,
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Relevance Feedback
Posted by Peter Carlson <ca...@bookandhammer.com>.
Hi Joshua,
Would you be willing to contribute your term expansion code?
I think many people would find this useful, and I would like to see this
added into the core of Lucene as a expandedTermQuery if that makes sense.
Thanks
--Peter
On 3/29/02 12:11 PM, "Joshua O'Madadhain" <jm...@ics.uci.edu> wrote:
>
> While I did weight documents based on the terms they used (take a look at
> TermQuery.setBoost()), I didn't do relevance feedback per se. Of course,
> how you want to implement relevance feedback will depend on what mechanism
> you want to use.
>
> If you'd like to discuss this offline (since we may be getting off the
> list topic), feel free to email me.
>
> Regards,
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Relevance Feedback
Posted by Joshua O'Madadhain <jm...@ics.uci.edu>.
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Nathan G. Freier wrote:
> I'm a graduate student in the Information School at the University of
> Washington. I'm currently in the process of developing a prototype
> online IR system and I have been making use of Lucene's API. I'm just
> beginning to plan out some mechanisms for query expansion and relevance
> feedback. I haven't seen any mention of manual or automated query
> expansion or user relevance feedback in the Lucene documentation or FAQs.
>
> Does anyone have any experience with these processes in general and/or
> specifically with Lucene? If so, did you have to reimplement Lucene's
> Scorer to incorporate the relevance measures? Any pointers to
> information on how practical this redesign would be? Will I be able to
> implement query expansion and/or relevance feedback without
> reconstructing some of Lucene's underlying scoring code?
I've also been doing research in IR using the Lucene API. Regarding query
expansion, I wrote my own code to do that, based on an algorithm I
developed (which is a type of thesaurus-based expansion). Basically I ran
the original query terms through the appropriate analyzers, decided what
terms I wanted to add, and constructed my own Query from these terms
(using TermQuery and BooleanQuery).
While I did weight documents based on the terms they used (take a look at
TermQuery.setBoost()), I didn't do relevance feedback per se. Of course,
how you want to implement relevance feedback will depend on what mechanism
you want to use.
If you'd like to discuss this offline (since we may be getting off the
list topic), feel free to email me.
Regards,
Joshua
PS: Say hi to Wanda Pratt for me.
jmadden@ics.uci.edu...Obscurium Per Obscurius...www.ics.uci.edu/~jmadden
Joshua Madden: Information Scientist, Musician, Philosopher-At-Tall
It's that moment of dawning comprehension that I live for--Bill Watterson
My opinions are too rational and insightful to be those of any organization.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>