You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-user@lucene.apache.org by Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com> on 2017/04/13 17:49:10 UTC

keywords not found - google like feature

Hello All,

When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)

Does Solr provide such feature ?


Thanks,
Nilesh Kamani

Re: keywords not found - google like feature

Posted by Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for your input guys. I will look into it.

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 4:07 PM, simon <mt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Regardless of the business case (which would be good to know) you might
> want to try something along the lines of
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/25038080/how-can-i-
> tell-solr-to-return-the-hit-search-terms-per-document
> - basically generate pseudo-fields using the exists() function query which
> will return a boolean if the term is in a specific field.
> I've used this for simple cases where it worked well, though I wouldn't
> like to speculate on how well this scales if you have an edismax query
> where you might need to generate multiple term/field combinations.
>
> HTH
>
> -Simon
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafalov@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Are you asking visual representation or an actual feature. Because if
> > all your keywords/clauses are optional (default SHOULD) then Solr
> > automatically tries to match maximum number of them and then less and
> > less. So, if all words do not match, it will return results that match
> > less number of words.
> >
> > And words not-matched is effectively your strike-through negative
> > space. You can probably recover that from debug info, though it will
> > be not pretty and perhaps a bit slower.
> >
> > The real issue here is ranking. Does Google do something special with
> > ranking when they do strike through. Do they do some grouping and
> > ranking within groups, not just a global one?
> >
> > The biggest question is - of course - what is your business - as
> > opposed to look-alike - objective. Because explaining your needs
> > through a similarity with other product's secret implementation is a
> > long way to get there. Too much precision loss in each explanation
> > round.
> >
> > Regards,
> >    Alex.
> > ----
> > http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and
> experienced
> >
> >
> > On 13 April 2017 at 20:49, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Hello All,
> > >
> > > When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
> > > keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)
> > >
> > > Does Solr provide such feature ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nilesh Kamani
> >
>

Re: keywords not found - google like feature

Posted by simon <mt...@gmail.com>.
Regardless of the business case (which would be good to know) you might
want to try something along the lines of
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/25038080/how-can-i-tell-solr-to-return-the-hit-search-terms-per-document
- basically generate pseudo-fields using the exists() function query which
will return a boolean if the term is in a specific field.
I've used this for simple cases where it worked well, though I wouldn't
like to speculate on how well this scales if you have an edismax query
where you might need to generate multiple term/field combinations.

HTH

-Simon

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Are you asking visual representation or an actual feature. Because if
> all your keywords/clauses are optional (default SHOULD) then Solr
> automatically tries to match maximum number of them and then less and
> less. So, if all words do not match, it will return results that match
> less number of words.
>
> And words not-matched is effectively your strike-through negative
> space. You can probably recover that from debug info, though it will
> be not pretty and perhaps a bit slower.
>
> The real issue here is ranking. Does Google do something special with
> ranking when they do strike through. Do they do some grouping and
> ranking within groups, not just a global one?
>
> The biggest question is - of course - what is your business - as
> opposed to look-alike - objective. Because explaining your needs
> through a similarity with other product's secret implementation is a
> long way to get there. Too much precision loss in each explanation
> round.
>
> Regards,
>    Alex.
> ----
> http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced
>
>
> On 13 April 2017 at 20:49, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
> > keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)
> >
> > Does Solr provide such feature ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nilesh Kamani
>

Re: keywords not found - google like feature

Posted by Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com>.
Here is the example.
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=solr+spring+trump

You will see this under search results.  Missing: trump

I am not asking for visual representation of such feature.
Is there anyway solr is returning such info in response ?
My client has this specific requirements that when he searches he wants to
know what keywords were not found in results.




On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Are you asking visual representation or an actual feature. Because if
> all your keywords/clauses are optional (default SHOULD) then Solr
> automatically tries to match maximum number of them and then less and
> less. So, if all words do not match, it will return results that match
> less number of words.
>
> And words not-matched is effectively your strike-through negative
> space. You can probably recover that from debug info, though it will
> be not pretty and perhaps a bit slower.
>
> The real issue here is ranking. Does Google do something special with
> ranking when they do strike through. Do they do some grouping and
> ranking within groups, not just a global one?
>
> The biggest question is - of course - what is your business - as
> opposed to look-alike - objective. Because explaining your needs
> through a similarity with other product's secret implementation is a
> long way to get there. Too much precision loss in each explanation
> round.
>
> Regards,
>    Alex.
> ----
> http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced
>
>
> On 13 April 2017 at 20:49, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
> > keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)
> >
> > Does Solr provide such feature ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nilesh Kamani
>

Re: keywords not found - google like feature

Posted by Alexandre Rafalovitch <ar...@gmail.com>.
Are you asking visual representation or an actual feature. Because if
all your keywords/clauses are optional (default SHOULD) then Solr
automatically tries to match maximum number of them and then less and
less. So, if all words do not match, it will return results that match
less number of words.

And words not-matched is effectively your strike-through negative
space. You can probably recover that from debug info, though it will
be not pretty and perhaps a bit slower.

The real issue here is ranking. Does Google do something special with
ranking when they do strike through. Do they do some grouping and
ranking within groups, not just a global one?

The biggest question is - of course - what is your business - as
opposed to look-alike - objective. Because explaining your needs
through a similarity with other product's secret implementation is a
long way to get there. Too much precision loss in each explanation
round.

Regards,
   Alex.
----
http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced


On 13 April 2017 at 20:49, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
> keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)
>
> Does Solr provide such feature ?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Nilesh Kamani

Re: keywords not found - google like feature

Posted by GW <th...@gmail.com>.
After reading everyone's post, my thoughts are sometimes things are better
achieved with smoke and mirrors.

I achieved something similar by measuring my scores with no keyword hits. I
wrote simple jquery script to do a CSS strike through on the returned
message if the score was poor, + I returned zero results. I run different
CSS for different messages all the time. Kind of working from the vantage
that if your score is crap so are the results. Generally I can get my
searches down to ['response']['numFound']=0 ~ I animate the message
sometimes.



.

On 13 April 2017 at 13:49, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
> keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)
>
> Does Solr provide such feature ?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Nilesh Kamani
>

Re: keywords not found - google like feature

Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
Pasted images are generally stripped out, you'll have to provide an
external link.

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Something like this. Does SOLR have such feature ?
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
>> keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)
>>
>> Does Solr provide such feature ?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nilesh Kamani
>>
>
>

Re: keywords not found - google like feature

Posted by Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com>.
Something like this. Does SOLR have such feature ?

[image: Inline image 1]

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Nilesh Kamani <ni...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> When we search google, sometimes google returns results with mention of
> keywords not found (mentioned as strike-through)
>
> Does Solr provide such feature ?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Nilesh Kamani
>