Karl, you are right.
this is one of the ways i originally used this thing.
i've done some relevance experiments along these lines (some summary
results here
http://www.slideshare.net/otisg/finite-state-queries-in-lucene).
in this case i compared 3 cases: index-time porter stemming,
index-time plural stemming, and query-time plural stemming (with
automaton).
in general you can get similar results, slower query speed, but more
flexibility. for instance, you could have a queryparser that
implements a stem() operator without indexing everything twice.
probably pretty boring for most people, but in some cases (e.g. lots
of languages) query-time starts to become more attractive...
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:18 PM, <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I had an interesting conversation with Simon a few weeks back. It occurred
> to me that it might be possible to build an automata that handles stemming
> and pluralization on searches. Just a thought…
>
> Karl
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[hidden email]
Locked
