Combine solr's document score with a static, indexed score in solr 7.x
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I have people indexed into solr based on structured documents. For simplicity's sake, let's say they have the following schema
{
personName: text,
games :[ { gamerScore: int, game: text } ]
}
An example of the above would be
{
personName: john,
games: [
{ gamerScore: 80, game: Zelda },
{ gamerScore: 20, game: Space Invader },
{ gamerScore: 60, game: Tetris},
]
}
'gamerScore' (a value between 1 and 100 to indicate how good the person is in the specified game).
Relevance matching in solr is all done through the Text field 'game'. However, I want my final result list to be a combination of relevance to the query as provided by solr and my own gamerScore. Namely, I need to re-rank the results based on the following formula:
personFinalScore = (0.8 * solrScore) + (0.2 * gamerScore)
What am trying to achieve is the combination of two different scores in a weighted manner in solr. This question was asked a long time ago, and was wondering if there is something in solr v7.x. that can tackle this.
I can change the schema around if a solution requires it.
solr lucene information-retrieval
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I have people indexed into solr based on structured documents. For simplicity's sake, let's say they have the following schema
{
personName: text,
games :[ { gamerScore: int, game: text } ]
}
An example of the above would be
{
personName: john,
games: [
{ gamerScore: 80, game: Zelda },
{ gamerScore: 20, game: Space Invader },
{ gamerScore: 60, game: Tetris},
]
}
'gamerScore' (a value between 1 and 100 to indicate how good the person is in the specified game).
Relevance matching in solr is all done through the Text field 'game'. However, I want my final result list to be a combination of relevance to the query as provided by solr and my own gamerScore. Namely, I need to re-rank the results based on the following formula:
personFinalScore = (0.8 * solrScore) + (0.2 * gamerScore)
What am trying to achieve is the combination of two different scores in a weighted manner in solr. This question was asked a long time ago, and was wondering if there is something in solr v7.x. that can tackle this.
I can change the schema around if a solution requires it.
solr lucene information-retrieval
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I have people indexed into solr based on structured documents. For simplicity's sake, let's say they have the following schema
{
personName: text,
games :[ { gamerScore: int, game: text } ]
}
An example of the above would be
{
personName: john,
games: [
{ gamerScore: 80, game: Zelda },
{ gamerScore: 20, game: Space Invader },
{ gamerScore: 60, game: Tetris},
]
}
'gamerScore' (a value between 1 and 100 to indicate how good the person is in the specified game).
Relevance matching in solr is all done through the Text field 'game'. However, I want my final result list to be a combination of relevance to the query as provided by solr and my own gamerScore. Namely, I need to re-rank the results based on the following formula:
personFinalScore = (0.8 * solrScore) + (0.2 * gamerScore)
What am trying to achieve is the combination of two different scores in a weighted manner in solr. This question was asked a long time ago, and was wondering if there is something in solr v7.x. that can tackle this.
I can change the schema around if a solution requires it.
solr lucene information-retrieval
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
I have people indexed into solr based on structured documents. For simplicity's sake, let's say they have the following schema
{
personName: text,
games :[ { gamerScore: int, game: text } ]
}
An example of the above would be
{
personName: john,
games: [
{ gamerScore: 80, game: Zelda },
{ gamerScore: 20, game: Space Invader },
{ gamerScore: 60, game: Tetris},
]
}
'gamerScore' (a value between 1 and 100 to indicate how good the person is in the specified game).
Relevance matching in solr is all done through the Text field 'game'. However, I want my final result list to be a combination of relevance to the query as provided by solr and my own gamerScore. Namely, I need to re-rank the results based on the following formula:
personFinalScore = (0.8 * solrScore) + (0.2 * gamerScore)
What am trying to achieve is the combination of two different scores in a weighted manner in solr. This question was asked a long time ago, and was wondering if there is something in solr v7.x. that can tackle this.
I can change the schema around if a solution requires it.
solr lucene information-retrieval
solr lucene information-retrieval
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
edited Nov 30 at 14:02
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
asked Nov 22 at 15:27
J S
61110
61110
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
In effect your formula can be simplified to applying your gamerScore with 0.25 - the absolute value of the score is irrelevant, just how much the gamerScore field affects the score of the document.
The dismax based handlers supports bf:
The bf parameter specifies functions (with optional boosts) that will
be used to construct FunctionQueries which will be added to the user’s
main query as optional clauses that will influence the score.
Since bf is an addtive boost, you can use bf=product(gamerScore,0.25) to make the gamerScore count 20% of the total score.
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
thank you, I might be missing something. Here is an example, how would your suggestion work if hypothetically, we have 3 players and all three played multiple games and they also played "Zelda" and they have the following scores for "Zelda" [Player1: 30, Player2: 50, Player3: 5]. if I search for Zelda, The results should come up as P2, P1, P3. I don't see how the function boost can work here. Or how it can take the Zelda Score only and compare it to other player's Zelda scores.
– J S
Dec 4 at 18:26
1
In your example you don't need any boosting - a simplesort=zelda descwould suffice. You'd index the "zelda" score into a field namedzeldain that case, and order by it. Boosting is useful for what you described - moving other results around based on a different factor, not straight up ordering. To apply it as a boost to achieve your formula, index it into a field named as the game as well, then apply that as a boost as described.
– MatsLindh
Dec 4 at 21:25
Are you saying I should create a dynamic filed called "game_*" and at insertion time it would be "game_zelda" with a static value as above. if so, what would happen at query time? for instance, if a person query for a game that I don't have any player for. Example game_SLKHF. Moreover, what happens when the query contain multiple games. I understand sort will not take into account all the games then sort, rather sort on the first field, and then the second and so forth. "
– J S
Dec 4 at 22:09
Correct. At query time the boost from the field will be applied if the field exists. Boosting changes the score of documents - possibly reordering them - the selection of documents isn't affected. You'll usefqfor that (or the regular query). If the query contains multiple games that you've detected, you add them as separate fields and add boosts for each game.
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 10:00
To add to my previous comment - the best way to actually implement this (through game detection) is to first use the query to search a collection with valid games, then use the list returned from that collection to generate field names (i.e.game_<game_id>, wheregame_idis unique for that game (i.e.zeldaorzelda_2, etc.).
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 13:28
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
In effect your formula can be simplified to applying your gamerScore with 0.25 - the absolute value of the score is irrelevant, just how much the gamerScore field affects the score of the document.
The dismax based handlers supports bf:
The bf parameter specifies functions (with optional boosts) that will
be used to construct FunctionQueries which will be added to the user’s
main query as optional clauses that will influence the score.
Since bf is an addtive boost, you can use bf=product(gamerScore,0.25) to make the gamerScore count 20% of the total score.
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
thank you, I might be missing something. Here is an example, how would your suggestion work if hypothetically, we have 3 players and all three played multiple games and they also played "Zelda" and they have the following scores for "Zelda" [Player1: 30, Player2: 50, Player3: 5]. if I search for Zelda, The results should come up as P2, P1, P3. I don't see how the function boost can work here. Or how it can take the Zelda Score only and compare it to other player's Zelda scores.
– J S
Dec 4 at 18:26
1
In your example you don't need any boosting - a simplesort=zelda descwould suffice. You'd index the "zelda" score into a field namedzeldain that case, and order by it. Boosting is useful for what you described - moving other results around based on a different factor, not straight up ordering. To apply it as a boost to achieve your formula, index it into a field named as the game as well, then apply that as a boost as described.
– MatsLindh
Dec 4 at 21:25
Are you saying I should create a dynamic filed called "game_*" and at insertion time it would be "game_zelda" with a static value as above. if so, what would happen at query time? for instance, if a person query for a game that I don't have any player for. Example game_SLKHF. Moreover, what happens when the query contain multiple games. I understand sort will not take into account all the games then sort, rather sort on the first field, and then the second and so forth. "
– J S
Dec 4 at 22:09
Correct. At query time the boost from the field will be applied if the field exists. Boosting changes the score of documents - possibly reordering them - the selection of documents isn't affected. You'll usefqfor that (or the regular query). If the query contains multiple games that you've detected, you add them as separate fields and add boosts for each game.
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 10:00
To add to my previous comment - the best way to actually implement this (through game detection) is to first use the query to search a collection with valid games, then use the list returned from that collection to generate field names (i.e.game_<game_id>, wheregame_idis unique for that game (i.e.zeldaorzelda_2, etc.).
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 13:28
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
In effect your formula can be simplified to applying your gamerScore with 0.25 - the absolute value of the score is irrelevant, just how much the gamerScore field affects the score of the document.
The dismax based handlers supports bf:
The bf parameter specifies functions (with optional boosts) that will
be used to construct FunctionQueries which will be added to the user’s
main query as optional clauses that will influence the score.
Since bf is an addtive boost, you can use bf=product(gamerScore,0.25) to make the gamerScore count 20% of the total score.
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
thank you, I might be missing something. Here is an example, how would your suggestion work if hypothetically, we have 3 players and all three played multiple games and they also played "Zelda" and they have the following scores for "Zelda" [Player1: 30, Player2: 50, Player3: 5]. if I search for Zelda, The results should come up as P2, P1, P3. I don't see how the function boost can work here. Or how it can take the Zelda Score only and compare it to other player's Zelda scores.
– J S
Dec 4 at 18:26
1
In your example you don't need any boosting - a simplesort=zelda descwould suffice. You'd index the "zelda" score into a field namedzeldain that case, and order by it. Boosting is useful for what you described - moving other results around based on a different factor, not straight up ordering. To apply it as a boost to achieve your formula, index it into a field named as the game as well, then apply that as a boost as described.
– MatsLindh
Dec 4 at 21:25
Are you saying I should create a dynamic filed called "game_*" and at insertion time it would be "game_zelda" with a static value as above. if so, what would happen at query time? for instance, if a person query for a game that I don't have any player for. Example game_SLKHF. Moreover, what happens when the query contain multiple games. I understand sort will not take into account all the games then sort, rather sort on the first field, and then the second and so forth. "
– J S
Dec 4 at 22:09
Correct. At query time the boost from the field will be applied if the field exists. Boosting changes the score of documents - possibly reordering them - the selection of documents isn't affected. You'll usefqfor that (or the regular query). If the query contains multiple games that you've detected, you add them as separate fields and add boosts for each game.
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 10:00
To add to my previous comment - the best way to actually implement this (through game detection) is to first use the query to search a collection with valid games, then use the list returned from that collection to generate field names (i.e.game_<game_id>, wheregame_idis unique for that game (i.e.zeldaorzelda_2, etc.).
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 13:28
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
In effect your formula can be simplified to applying your gamerScore with 0.25 - the absolute value of the score is irrelevant, just how much the gamerScore field affects the score of the document.
The dismax based handlers supports bf:
The bf parameter specifies functions (with optional boosts) that will
be used to construct FunctionQueries which will be added to the user’s
main query as optional clauses that will influence the score.
Since bf is an addtive boost, you can use bf=product(gamerScore,0.25) to make the gamerScore count 20% of the total score.
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
In effect your formula can be simplified to applying your gamerScore with 0.25 - the absolute value of the score is irrelevant, just how much the gamerScore field affects the score of the document.
The dismax based handlers supports bf:
The bf parameter specifies functions (with optional boosts) that will
be used to construct FunctionQueries which will be added to the user’s
main query as optional clauses that will influence the score.
Since bf is an addtive boost, you can use bf=product(gamerScore,0.25) to make the gamerScore count 20% of the total score.
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
answered Nov 30 at 22:10
MatsLindh
24.5k22240
24.5k22240
thank you, I might be missing something. Here is an example, how would your suggestion work if hypothetically, we have 3 players and all three played multiple games and they also played "Zelda" and they have the following scores for "Zelda" [Player1: 30, Player2: 50, Player3: 5]. if I search for Zelda, The results should come up as P2, P1, P3. I don't see how the function boost can work here. Or how it can take the Zelda Score only and compare it to other player's Zelda scores.
– J S
Dec 4 at 18:26
1
In your example you don't need any boosting - a simplesort=zelda descwould suffice. You'd index the "zelda" score into a field namedzeldain that case, and order by it. Boosting is useful for what you described - moving other results around based on a different factor, not straight up ordering. To apply it as a boost to achieve your formula, index it into a field named as the game as well, then apply that as a boost as described.
– MatsLindh
Dec 4 at 21:25
Are you saying I should create a dynamic filed called "game_*" and at insertion time it would be "game_zelda" with a static value as above. if so, what would happen at query time? for instance, if a person query for a game that I don't have any player for. Example game_SLKHF. Moreover, what happens when the query contain multiple games. I understand sort will not take into account all the games then sort, rather sort on the first field, and then the second and so forth. "
– J S
Dec 4 at 22:09
Correct. At query time the boost from the field will be applied if the field exists. Boosting changes the score of documents - possibly reordering them - the selection of documents isn't affected. You'll usefqfor that (or the regular query). If the query contains multiple games that you've detected, you add them as separate fields and add boosts for each game.
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 10:00
To add to my previous comment - the best way to actually implement this (through game detection) is to first use the query to search a collection with valid games, then use the list returned from that collection to generate field names (i.e.game_<game_id>, wheregame_idis unique for that game (i.e.zeldaorzelda_2, etc.).
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 13:28
add a comment |
thank you, I might be missing something. Here is an example, how would your suggestion work if hypothetically, we have 3 players and all three played multiple games and they also played "Zelda" and they have the following scores for "Zelda" [Player1: 30, Player2: 50, Player3: 5]. if I search for Zelda, The results should come up as P2, P1, P3. I don't see how the function boost can work here. Or how it can take the Zelda Score only and compare it to other player's Zelda scores.
– J S
Dec 4 at 18:26
1
In your example you don't need any boosting - a simplesort=zelda descwould suffice. You'd index the "zelda" score into a field namedzeldain that case, and order by it. Boosting is useful for what you described - moving other results around based on a different factor, not straight up ordering. To apply it as a boost to achieve your formula, index it into a field named as the game as well, then apply that as a boost as described.
– MatsLindh
Dec 4 at 21:25
Are you saying I should create a dynamic filed called "game_*" and at insertion time it would be "game_zelda" with a static value as above. if so, what would happen at query time? for instance, if a person query for a game that I don't have any player for. Example game_SLKHF. Moreover, what happens when the query contain multiple games. I understand sort will not take into account all the games then sort, rather sort on the first field, and then the second and so forth. "
– J S
Dec 4 at 22:09
Correct. At query time the boost from the field will be applied if the field exists. Boosting changes the score of documents - possibly reordering them - the selection of documents isn't affected. You'll usefqfor that (or the regular query). If the query contains multiple games that you've detected, you add them as separate fields and add boosts for each game.
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 10:00
To add to my previous comment - the best way to actually implement this (through game detection) is to first use the query to search a collection with valid games, then use the list returned from that collection to generate field names (i.e.game_<game_id>, wheregame_idis unique for that game (i.e.zeldaorzelda_2, etc.).
– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 13:28
thank you, I might be missing something. Here is an example, how would your suggestion work if hypothetically, we have 3 players and all three played multiple games and they also played "Zelda" and they have the following scores for "Zelda" [Player1: 30, Player2: 50, Player3: 5]. if I search for Zelda, The results should come up as P2, P1, P3. I don't see how the function boost can work here. Or how it can take the Zelda Score only and compare it to other player's Zelda scores.
– J S
Dec 4 at 18:26
thank you, I might be missing something. Here is an example, how would your suggestion work if hypothetically, we have 3 players and all three played multiple games and they also played "Zelda" and they have the following scores for "Zelda" [Player1: 30, Player2: 50, Player3: 5]. if I search for Zelda, The results should come up as P2, P1, P3. I don't see how the function boost can work here. Or how it can take the Zelda Score only and compare it to other player's Zelda scores.
– J S
Dec 4 at 18:26
1
1
In your example you don't need any boosting - a simple
sort=zelda desc would suffice. You'd index the "zelda" score into a field named zelda in that case, and order by it. Boosting is useful for what you described - moving other results around based on a different factor, not straight up ordering. To apply it as a boost to achieve your formula, index it into a field named as the game as well, then apply that as a boost as described.– MatsLindh
Dec 4 at 21:25
In your example you don't need any boosting - a simple
sort=zelda desc would suffice. You'd index the "zelda" score into a field named zelda in that case, and order by it. Boosting is useful for what you described - moving other results around based on a different factor, not straight up ordering. To apply it as a boost to achieve your formula, index it into a field named as the game as well, then apply that as a boost as described.– MatsLindh
Dec 4 at 21:25
Are you saying I should create a dynamic filed called "game_*" and at insertion time it would be "game_zelda" with a static value as above. if so, what would happen at query time? for instance, if a person query for a game that I don't have any player for. Example game_SLKHF. Moreover, what happens when the query contain multiple games. I understand sort will not take into account all the games then sort, rather sort on the first field, and then the second and so forth. "
– J S
Dec 4 at 22:09
Are you saying I should create a dynamic filed called "game_*" and at insertion time it would be "game_zelda" with a static value as above. if so, what would happen at query time? for instance, if a person query for a game that I don't have any player for. Example game_SLKHF. Moreover, what happens when the query contain multiple games. I understand sort will not take into account all the games then sort, rather sort on the first field, and then the second and so forth. "
– J S
Dec 4 at 22:09
Correct. At query time the boost from the field will be applied if the field exists. Boosting changes the score of documents - possibly reordering them - the selection of documents isn't affected. You'll use
fq for that (or the regular query). If the query contains multiple games that you've detected, you add them as separate fields and add boosts for each game.– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 10:00
Correct. At query time the boost from the field will be applied if the field exists. Boosting changes the score of documents - possibly reordering them - the selection of documents isn't affected. You'll use
fq for that (or the regular query). If the query contains multiple games that you've detected, you add them as separate fields and add boosts for each game.– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 10:00
To add to my previous comment - the best way to actually implement this (through game detection) is to first use the query to search a collection with valid games, then use the list returned from that collection to generate field names (i.e.
game_<game_id>, where game_id is unique for that game (i.e. zelda or zelda_2, etc.).– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 13:28
To add to my previous comment - the best way to actually implement this (through game detection) is to first use the query to search a collection with valid games, then use the list returned from that collection to generate field names (i.e.
game_<game_id>, where game_id is unique for that game (i.e. zelda or zelda_2, etc.).– MatsLindh
Dec 5 at 13:28
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53434105%2fcombine-solrs-document-score-with-a-static-indexed-score-in-solr-7-x%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
