You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Joshua O'Madadhain <jm...@ics.uci.edu> on 2002/02/19 09:22:58 UTC
Re: Lucene Query Structure
Actually, Winton's suggestion doesn't work because it's inconsistent with
the syntax of BooleanQuery() (the constructor doesn't take arguments, and
add() takes one Query argument, not two).
After considerable study of the documentation, I am still confused about
the semantics of BooleanQuery. I think I can answer the original
syntactic question posed by sjb, but the overall motivation escapes me.
I believe the correct syntax is (given TermQueries a, b, c, and d):
// create a BooleanQuery for '(a AND b)'
BooleanQuery bq_ab = new BooleanQuery();
bq_ab.add(a, true, false);
bq_ab.add(b, true, false);
// same as above with c and d
BooleanQuery bq_cd = new BooleanQuery();
bq_cd.add(c, true, false);
bq_cd.add(d, true, false);
// join two BooleanQueries together
BooleanQuery bq_abcd = new BooleanQuery();
bq_abcd.add(bq_ab, false, false);
bq_abcd.add(bq_cd, false, false);
Now, as sjb pointed out, "(query, false, false)" doesn't really seem to
have the semantics of a boolean OR. In particular:
(1) It's a unary operator: add() adds a Query (or a BooleanClause) to a
BooleanQuery. OR is a binary operator.
(2) "add.(query, false, false)" adds a query Q whose satisfaction is
*irrelevant* to that of the resultant BooleanQuery BQ: documents are
neither required to satisfy Q, nor required to *not* satisfy Q, in order
for BQ to be satisfied. The semantics of a boolean OR should be that at
least *one* of the components (queries) must be satisfied in order for the
entire expression (composite query) to be satisfied.
I conclude that either
(a) I simply don't understand the proper use of BooleanQuery, or
(b) BooleanQuery cannot be used to express a boolean OR.
If (b) is true, either the semantics of BooleanQuery need revising, or
it needs to get called something else so as not to be confusing.
If the semantics of BooleanQuery are revised, I would suggest changing the
syntax as well to reflect the binary nature of Boolean operators:
BooleanQuery.add(Query q1, Query q2, boolean and)
which would equate to (q1 AND q2) if 'and' is true, otherwise (q1 OR q2).
If there are any papers or references which would explain this better,
that would be great. Otherwise, I would really appreciate it if one of
the developers would take a few moments to clarify this issue. I'm trying
to use Lucene as a platform for research in IR; to do this I need a clear
understanding of the exact definition of the scoring system, especially as
it relates to the semantics of queries involving multiple terms.
Once I get a clear understanding of this issue, I would be happy to write
it up and submit it as an addition to the FAQ/docs.
Thanks in advance for any assistance rendered in getting this sorted out.
Regards,
Joshua
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Winton Davies wrote:
> BQ(Term, Term, Include, Exclude)
>
> BQ(
> BQ(a,b,true,false)
> BQ(a,b,true,false)
> false,
> false)
>
> Should work...
> Winton
> >Lets say I have two queries which I want to combine into one:
> >
> >(a and b) OR (c and d)
> >
> >I would use QueryParser.parse to form the subqueries, but how do I/can I
> >combine them with the OR logic?
> >
> >The BooleanQuery can be used to piece queries together but it does not
> >support OR's correct? (It only supports include, exclude, and
> >"preferential".)
> >
> >Thanks for any help,
> >
> >sjb
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>
Re: Lucene Query Structure
Posted by Winton Davies <wd...@cs.stanford.edu>.
Apologies for the misleading quote, but you got the right syntax in
the end it would seem.
I believe that the add(x,false,false) is just what you need for OR...
The Unary version is kind of ok -- OR is at least one member of a set
present... the set of size one is still a set, it just happens to
co-incide with the case of AND which is all of them members of a set.
2 and more members of a set are obvious. As Doug pointed out OR isn't
a binary operator (or teriary and so on) (although though it is a
Boolean operator :) )
Cheers and sorry again for confusing the issue :)
Winton
>Actually, Winton's suggestion doesn't work because it's inconsistent with
>the syntax of BooleanQuery() (the constructor doesn't take arguments, and
>add() takes one Query argument, not two).
>
>After considerable study of the documentation, I am still confused about
>the semantics of BooleanQuery. I think I can answer the original
>syntactic question posed by sjb, but the overall motivation escapes me.
>
>I believe the correct syntax is (given TermQueries a, b, c, and d):
>
>// create a BooleanQuery for '(a AND b)'
>BooleanQuery bq_ab = new BooleanQuery();
>bq_ab.add(a, true, false);
>bq_ab.add(b, true, false);
>
>// same as above with c and d
>BooleanQuery bq_cd = new BooleanQuery();
>bq_cd.add(c, true, false);
>bq_cd.add(d, true, false);
>
>// join two BooleanQueries together
>BooleanQuery bq_abcd = new BooleanQuery();
>bq_abcd.add(bq_ab, false, false);
>bq_abcd.add(bq_cd, false, false);
>
>
>Now, as sjb pointed out, "(query, false, false)" doesn't really seem to
>have the semantics of a boolean OR. In particular:
>
>(1) It's a unary operator: add() adds a Query (or a BooleanClause) to a
>BooleanQuery. OR is a binary operator.
>
>(2) "add.(query, false, false)" adds a query Q whose satisfaction is
>*irrelevant* to that of the resultant BooleanQuery BQ: documents are
>neither required to satisfy Q, nor required to *not* satisfy Q, in order
>for BQ to be satisfied. The semantics of a boolean OR should be that at
>least *one* of the components (queries) must be satisfied in order for the
>entire expression (composite query) to be satisfied.
>
>
>I conclude that either
>(a) I simply don't understand the proper use of BooleanQuery, or
>(b) BooleanQuery cannot be used to express a boolean OR.
>
>If (b) is true, either the semantics of BooleanQuery need revising, or
>it needs to get called something else so as not to be confusing.
>
>If the semantics of BooleanQuery are revised, I would suggest changing the
>syntax as well to reflect the binary nature of Boolean operators:
>
>BooleanQuery.add(Query q1, Query q2, boolean and)
>
>which would equate to (q1 AND q2) if 'and' is true, otherwise (q1 OR q2).
>
>
>If there are any papers or references which would explain this better,
>that would be great. Otherwise, I would really appreciate it if one of
>the developers would take a few moments to clarify this issue. I'm trying
>to use Lucene as a platform for research in IR; to do this I need a clear
>understanding of the exact definition of the scoring system, especially as
>it relates to the semantics of queries involving multiple terms.
>
>Once I get a clear understanding of this issue, I would be happy to write
>it up and submit it as an addition to the FAQ/docs.
>
>Thanks in advance for any assistance rendered in getting this sorted out.
>
>Regards,
>
>Joshua
>
>On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Winton Davies wrote:
>
>> BQ(Term, Term, Include, Exclude)
>>
>> BQ(
>> BQ(a,b,true,false)
>> BQ(a,b,true,false)
>> false,
>> false)
>>
>> Should work...
>> Winton
>
>> >Lets say I have two queries which I want to combine into one:
>> >
>> >(a and b) OR (c and d)
>> >
>> >I would use QueryParser.parse to form the subqueries, but how do I/can I
>> >combine them with the OR logic?
>> >
>> >The BooleanQuery can be used to piece queries together but it does not
>> >support OR's correct? (It only supports include, exclude, and
>> >"preferential".)
>> >
>> >Thanks for any help,
>> >
>> >sjb
>
>
>
> 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>
--
Winton Davies
Lead Engineer, Overture (NSDQ: OVER)
1820 Gateway Drive, Suite 360
San Mateo, CA 94404
work: (650) 403-2259
cell: (650) 867-1598
http://www.overture.com/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>