From f7dc76443d122c60763e6f4ede69d7777a3bfe1e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luuk Arts Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:30:16 +0100 Subject: Update Evaluation.md --- Evaluation.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Evaluation.md b/Evaluation.md index f32cf82..0a08922 100644 --- a/Evaluation.md +++ b/Evaluation.md @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ The results we obtained are described in the second blogpost: implementation. In Some fields that scored well using our human assesment as a relevance measures turned out to have a low ranking when using bm25. These fields are `` (802), `` (299), `` (266). -In this case, we might try adding fields that have a high BM25 score. The fields with the top two ranks in both the bm25 and the human assesment rankings are `` and ``. Even though these fields are ranked so highly by BM25 we do not recommend adding them both, since the `` field is simply a shorter version of ``. Also, since these fields contain large texts, adding them both to the index would likely increase the computing time by quite a bit. Instead, we recommend only adding the `` field. +In this case, we might try adding fields that have a high BM25 score. The fields with the top two ranks in both the BM25 and the human assesment rankings are `` and ``. Even though these fields are ranked so highly by BM25 we do not recommend adding them both, since the `` field is simply a shorter version of ``. Also, since these fields contain large texts, adding them both to the index would likely increase the computing time by quite a bit. Instead, we recommend only adding the `` field. Another field is ``, which is rank 7 for BM25. However, `` can be the caption of an image or an table, which tend to be very specific and not very likely to be relevant overall. -- cgit v1.2.3