【问题标题】:SOLR eDismax typo tolerance for phrases短语的 SOLR eDismax 错字容错
【发布时间】:2018-01-05 16:07:23
【问题描述】:

如何构建查询来搜索确切的短语以及带有一些拼写错误的短语?我被困在这上面,看起来我走错了方向。

例如,我的 edismax 查询中有下一个字段:

q=apple iphone

它有效,但现在我需要让它更能容忍拼写错误。我更新了我的查询,现在即使用户输入错误,它也会返回与以前相同的结果:

q=aple~2 iphane~2

接下来我发现现在确切的查询匹配并不总是在第一页上(例如,我真的有产品'aple iphane')。因此,我使用“或”条件添加了确切的查询。现在我的查询看起来像

q=(aple~2 iphane~2) OR 'aple iphane'^3

问题是,它现在只返回完全匹配并且不再返回模糊条目。我做错了什么?

这里是完整的查询:

http://localhost:8983/solr/test/select?omitHeader=true
&q=(aple~2 iphane~2) OR 'aple iphane'^3
&start=0
&rows=30
&fl=*,score
&fq=itemType:"Product"
&defType=edismax
&qf=title_de^1000 title_de_ranked^1000 description_de^1 category_name_de^50 brand^15 merchant_name^80 uniuque_values^10000 searchable_attribute_product.name^1000 searchable_attribute_product.description.short^100 searchable_attribute_product.description.long^100 searchable_attribute_mb.book.author^500
&mm=90
&pf=title_de^2000 description_de^2
&ps=1
&qs=2
&boost=category_boost
&mm.autoRelax=true
&wt=json
&json.nl=flat

是我查询有误,还是我选择的方式完全错误?

我想在'title_de'中找到这个短语,所有其他字段都是次要的。这是我的架构中的字段类型:

<fieldType name="text_de_ngram" class="solr.TextField" positionIncrementGap="100">
    <analyzer type="index">
        <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" ignoreCase="true" words="lang/stopwords_de.txt" />
        <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.KeywordMarkerFilterFactory" protected="protwords.txt"/>
        <filter class="solr.GermanNormalizationFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.GermanLightStemFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.NGramFilterFactory" minGramSize="2" maxGramSize="25"/>
    </analyzer>
    <analyzer type="query">
        <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.SynonymFilterFactory" synonyms="synonyms.txt" ignoreCase="true" expand="true"/>
        <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" ignoreCase="true" words="lang/stopwords_de.txt" />
        <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.KeywordMarkerFilterFactory" protected="protwords.txt"/>
        <filter class="solr.GermanNormalizationFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.GermanLightStemFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.SnowballPorterFilterFactory" language="German" />
    </analyzer>
</fieldType>

谢谢!


更新: 我发现我的查询 (q=(aple~2 iphane~2) OR 'aple iphane'^3) 不正确,所以我找到了如何构建 2 个其他查询,效果更好,您可以在帖子结束。我仍然不知道为什么它们会给出不同的结果,因为 SOLR 查询的默认运算符是 'OR',所以 'term1 OR term2 OR term3 OR term4' 应该与 '(term1 OR term2) OR (term3 OR term4) 相同。
正如 @Persimmonium 所建议的,我添加了一些调试示例来展示 edismax 的模糊查询的工作原理(但并不总是预期的)。 我发现“apple iphone”在我的大型德语索引中并不是最好的例子,所以我使用了名为“Samsung Magic Info-Lite”的产品作为例子

这里是我的查询的所有参数:

"params":{
      "mm":"100%",
      "q":"samsung magic",
      "defType":"edismax",
      "indent":"on",
      "qf":"title_de",
      "fl":"*,score",
      "pf":"title_de",
      "wt":"json",
      "debugQuery":"on",
      "_":"1501409530601"
}

所以,这个查询返回给我正确的产品(我有 6 个产品,在 title_de 字段中都有这两个词)。 在我为这两个词添加错别字后:

"q":"somsung majic"

没有找到产品。

然后我给这两个词加上模糊操作符:

"q":"somsung~2 majic~2"

找到 6 个产品。这是调试查询结果:

"debug":{
      "rawquerystring":"somsung~2 majic~2",
      "querystring":"somsung~2 majic~2",
      "parsedquery":"(+(DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:somsung~2)) DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:majic~2)))~2 DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:\"somsung 2 majic 2\")))/no_coord",
      "parsedquery_toString":"+(((title_de:somsung~2) (title_de:majic~2))~2) (title_de:\"somsung 2 majic 2\")",
      "explain":{
            "69019":"\n1.3424492 = sum of:\n  1.3424492 = sum of:\n    1.1036766 = sum of:\n      0.26367697 = weight(title_de:amsung in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n        0.26367697 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n          0.073149204 = queryWeight, product of:\n            0.6666666 = boost\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.015219777 = queryNorm\n          3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n            1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n              1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n      0.2373093 = weight(title_de:msung in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n        0.2373093 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n          0.06583429 = queryWeight, product of:\n            0.6 = boost\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.015219777 = queryNorm\n          3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n            1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n              1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n      0.26367697 = weight(title_de:samsun in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n        0.26367697 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n          0.073149204 = queryWeight, product of:\n            0.6666666 = boost\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.015219777 = queryNorm\n          3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n            1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n              1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n      0.33901328 = weight(title_de:samsung in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n        0.33901328 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n          0.094048984 = queryWeight, product of:\n            0.85714287 = boost\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.015219777 = queryNorm\n          3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n            1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n              1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n            7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              635.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n    0.23877257 = sum of:\n      0.23877257 = weight(title_de:magic in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n        0.23877257 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n          0.0762529 = queryWeight, product of:\n            0.8 = boost\n            6.262649 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              1638.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.015219777 = queryNorm\n          3.1313245 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n            1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n              1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n            6.262649 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n              1638.0 = docFreq\n              316313.0 = docCount\n            0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n",
      },
      "QParser":"ExtendedDismaxQParser"
}

这种行为让我很满意,直到我没有名为“Somsung majic”的真实产品。这是理论上的情况,但在实践中,这种模糊运算符会导致很多其他错误的搜索结果。

所以,为了处理这些事情,我的想法是正如我最初描述的那样,添加带有提升因子的确切条目(没有模糊修饰符)。所以,现在的问题是,如何更好地实施。我发现,如果我减少 mm 参数,这个查询的效果是可以接受的:

"q":"somsung~2 majic~2 somsung^3 majic^3"

因为我添加了更多的词来查询,所以“最小应该匹配”也需要减少。问题是,在具有确切标题条目的长标题上,减少“mm”会得到不好的结果(由于其他因素,一些错误的项目可能排名更高)。这是它的调试:

"debug":{
      "rawquerystring":"somsung~2 majic~2 somsung^3 majic^3",
      "querystring":"somsung~2 majic~2 somsung^3 majic^3",
      "parsedquery":"(+(DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:somsung~2)) DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:majic~2)) DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:somsung))^3.0 DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:majic))^3.0)~2 DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:\"somsung 2 majic 2 somsung 3 majic 3\")))/no_coord",
      "parsedquery_toString":"+(((title_de:somsung~2) (title_de:majic~2) ((title_de:somsung))^3.0 ((title_de:majic))^3.0)~2) (title_de:\"somsung 2 majic 2 somsung 3 majic 3\")",
      "explain":{
            "69019":"\n0.3418829 = sum of:\n  0.3418829 = product of:\n    0.6837658 = sum of:\n      0.5621489 = sum of:\n        0.13430178 = weight(title_de:amsung in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n          0.13430178 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n            0.037257966 = queryWeight, product of:\n              0.6666666 = boost\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.0077520725 = queryNorm\n            3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n              1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n                1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n        0.12087161 = weight(title_de:msung in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n          0.12087161 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n            0.033532172 = queryWeight, product of:\n              0.6 = boost\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.0077520725 = queryNorm\n            3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n              1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n                1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n        0.13430178 = weight(title_de:samsun in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n          0.13430178 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n            0.037257966 = queryWeight, product of:\n              0.6666666 = boost\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.0077520725 = queryNorm\n            3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n              1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n                1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n        0.17267373 = weight(title_de:samsung in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n          0.17267373 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n            0.047903106 = queryWeight, product of:\n              0.85714287 = boost\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.0077520725 = queryNorm\n            3.604646 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n              1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n                1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n              7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                635.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n      0.12161691 = sum of:\n        0.12161691 = weight(title_de:magic in 305456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n          0.12161691 = score(doc=305456,freq=1.0), product of:\n            0.038838807 = queryWeight, product of:\n              0.8 = boost\n              6.262649 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                1638.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.0077520725 = queryNorm\n            3.1313245 = fieldWeight in 305456, product of:\n              1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n                1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n              6.262649 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                1638.0 = docFreq\n                316313.0 = docCount\n              0.5 = fieldNorm(doc=305456)\n    0.5 = coord(2/4)\n"
      },
      "QParser":"ExtendedDismaxQParser"
}

即使使用大的“mm”参数(例如,90%),此查询也有效:

"q":"(somsung~2 majic~2) OR (somsung^3 majic^3)"

但这里的问题是我得到 430 个结果(而不是 6 个所需的结果)。 这是错误产品示例的调试:

"debug":{
      "rawquerystring":"(somsung~2 majic~2) OR (somsung^3 majic^3)",
      "querystring":"(somsung~2 majic~2) OR (somsung^3 majic^3)",
      "parsedquery":"(+((DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:somsung~2)) DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:majic~2))) (DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:somsung))^3.0 DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:majic))^3.0))~1 DisjunctionMaxQuery((title_de:\"somsung 2 majic 2 somsung 3 majic 3\")))/no_coord",
      "parsedquery_toString":"+((((title_de:somsung~2) (title_de:majic~2)) (((title_de:somsung))^3.0 ((title_de:majic))^3.0))~1) (title_de:\"somsung 2 majic 2 somsung 3 majic 3\")",
      "explain":{
            "113746":"\n0.1275867 = sum of:\n  0.1275867 = product of:\n    0.2551734 = sum of:\n      0.2551734 = product of:\n        0.5103468 = sum of:\n          0.5103468 = sum of:\n            0.26860356 = weight(title_de:losung in 296822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n              0.26860356 = score(doc=296822,freq=1.0), product of:\n                0.037257966 = queryWeight, product of:\n                  0.6666666 = boost\n                  7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                    635.0 = docFreq\n                    316313.0 = docCount\n                  0.0077520725 = queryNorm\n                7.209292 = fieldWeight in 296822, product of:\n                  1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n                    1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n                  7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                    635.0 = docFreq\n                    316313.0 = docCount\n                  1.0 = fieldNorm(doc=296822)\n            0.24174322 = weight(title_de:osung in 296822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:\n              0.24174322 = score(doc=296822,freq=1.0), product of:\n                0.033532172 = queryWeight, product of:\n                  0.6 = boost\n                  7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                    635.0 = docFreq\n                    316313.0 = docCount\n                  0.0077520725 = queryNorm\n                7.209292 = fieldWeight in 296822, product of:\n                  1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:\n                    1.0 = termFreq=1.0\n                  7.209292 = idf, computed as log((docCount+1)/(docFreq+1)) + 1 from:\n                    635.0 = docFreq\n                    316313.0 = docCount\n                  1.0 = fieldNorm(doc=296822)\n        0.5 = coord(1/2)\n    0.5 = coord(1/2)\n"
      },
      "QParser":"ExtendedDismaxQParser"
}

所以,虽然我得到了更好的结果,但我仍然需要改进搜索,我仍然不知道选择哪种方式以及为什么会得到这样的结果。

【问题讨论】:

    标签: search solr fuzzy edismax


    【解决方案1】:

    我认为 edismax 不支持模糊运算符 ~。有一个历史悠久的补丁here,开发者已经在生产环境中使用了很长时间,但它还没有进入 Solr 代码库。

    【讨论】:

    • 好的,如果 edismax 不支持模糊,为什么在我的查询中 'q=aple~2 iphane~2' 找到正确的结果?是否被解释为标准查询?
    • 使用 degugQuery=true 让我们找出答案
    • 我用新的实验和调试结果更新了描述。看起来 edismax 确实能够开箱即用地处理模糊查询。现在我比以前更困惑了:)
    【解决方案2】:

    edismax 与模糊一起使用,但是当您包含 mm=90 时,您基本上是在说 solr 应该匹配 90 个精确的短语。太高了!

    删除它或使用像 50% 这样的低百分比会使一些模糊性起作用

    【讨论】:

      猜你喜欢
      • 1970-01-01
      • 1970-01-01
      • 2020-03-21
      • 2012-12-24
      • 2011-12-10
      • 1970-01-01
      • 1970-01-01
      • 2015-11-04
      • 1970-01-01
      相关资源
      最近更新 更多