All. Forgive me I am a newbie in Solr, I am trying to add spell check in the Solr.
Currently I can say it works .But I got a problem which the suggestion is not showing up as I expected.
I tried to search with the keywords lu. and expect the suggestion lung in the result. But it doesn't show up.
the Url is http://10.2.21.38:7574/solr/gettingstarted_shard1_replica2/spell?q=lu&spellcheck=true&spellcheck.collate=true&spellcheck.build=true
Only when I tried with lun. It can return suggestion lung.
Any idea to get it work? Thanks.
Updated
It seems it has something with the configuration <str name="accuracy">{number}</str> the original value is 0.7. When I changed it to smaller value like 0.001 . keywords lu can get the suggestion lung.
But I want to know what does it mean for the accuracy. The document only say a little about it .The accuracy setting defines the threshold for a valid
suggestion. That is it.
Could someone please tell me more about it for better understanding . and Is there any other configuration to affect the suggestion result ? Thanks.
The accuracy setting refers to the value that the active StringDistance calculator returns (which is between 0 and 1, depending on similarity). The standard distance measurer in Lucene is the LevensteinDistance (sic). I'll refer to the source to see how it works - I'm not intimately familiar with the code. The returned value is at least based on:
return 1.0f - ((float) p[n] / Math.max(other.length(), sa.length));
Where p[n] is calculated through the iteration above in the code.
You can change most implementations in the spellchecker, such as the distance measurer or the spellchecker itself. See Spell Checking for examples. maxEdits and minPrefix might be interesting as well. Also, remember that lu and lung have a fairly large difference, as both terms are short and not really misspellings of each other. There are other ways of doing automagic completion, such as the Suggest module or wild card searching against a StrField or a KeywordTokenizer-ed field.
Related
I am trying to make a comparison between two different dates in the GDS and present that information in a scorecard.
I have done this in the past with no problem, but this time I want to do an absolute comparison. Although I checked the box to make it an absolute comparison, the information appears with a % sign after it. I would like to see a "p.p." after it or nothing at all.
How can I achieve this result?
You can find below an image of what is happening.
Thanks in advance!
UPDATE:
I solved the issue by aligning all the elements of that scorecard to the right and adding a text box in front of the % sign. It is not perfect, but it works.
Not the answer you're looking for, but I don't think this is currently possible. I had to add a disclaimer below the scorecards to indicate the comparison values are absolute (despite the percentages). Not ideal, but at least it shows the info
It seems to me that the definition of a EquivalentTo class doesn't work properly in Protégé 5.2.0. Hopefully, it is a misunderstanding on my side.
Here is the example : Link to a simple ontology that gives an unexpected result.
The problem happens when I use a min cardinality condition on some ObjectProperties. In the provided example, the classification in SubClassObject of the Object(using Pellet) doesn't work for the hasPart min 2 Part but does for hasPart min 1 Part. As you see, the element5 has 4 Parts as defined.
Has anybody ever met a similar issue?
Thank you in advance,
As #StanislavKralin said : Edit > Make all individuals different.
In my personal experience afterwards, be aware that it will considerably increase computing time of reasoning.
I am trying to integrate Rosenzweig-MacArthur model (equations) using Backward Differentiation Method using CVODE in C for stiff equations. I have to specify tolerance value for integration. Depending on the tolerance value I give, I get different solutions. I am not able to see which one is the correct solution. Can you please tell me what should (criteria for choosing) the tolerance value be?
I am currently trying to write a code to solve a non linear system of equations. I am using the functions of the gsl library, more specifically the multiroot_fdf_solver.
My problem is that it currently doesn't want to converge. More specifically, I have the following behavior:
-if my initial conditions are close to the result, the gsl_multiroot_fdf_solver_iterate does not update the parameters at all. I tried to display the results on the different steps, and I have for all the parameters dx = NaN (I think this quite srange), the status of gsl_multiroot_fdf_solver_iterate is "success" and the status of gsl_multiroot_test_residual is "the iteration has not converged yet"
-the parameters are only updated if my initial conditions are really far from the expected result. Obvisously in this case it does not converge to the right values.
I have already checked multiple times the expression of my function and my Jacobian, and they seem good.
I have to precise that my Jacobian (and my system as well) are quite complicated expression with many trigonometric function.
Would you have any idea of what it could be? Is it possible that if the expression of the Jacobian is too complicated, it has troubles to compute it?
Thank you in advance for your answers, I am really stucked at this point.
I'm performing gaussian mixture model classification, and based on that, used "mvnpdf" function in MATLAB.
As far as I know the function returns a multi variate probability density for the data points or elements passed to it.
However I'm trying to recreate it on C and I assumed that mvnpdf is the regular Gaussian distribution (clearly it is not) because the results don't match.
Does anyone know how "mvnpdf" works ? Because I haven't been able to find documentation on it .
The documentation for mvnpdf is here
if you are looking for the exact code just put a break point at the point where you call it and see how it works
Okay I actually found a decent link that explains in detail what's happening inside .
This might be a better link to look at - http://octave.sourceforge.net/statistics/function/mvnpdf.html