Re: adaptive word scoring

[Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@student.tuwien.ac.at>]

Hi,

>>>>> On 02 Dec 1996 12:46:00 +0100
>>>>> Hans de Graaff <J.J.deGraaff@twi.tudelft.nl> said:

 Hans> Felix Lee <flee@teleport.com> writes:
 >> so after using adaptive word scoring for a while, I've decided
 >> that it's mostly useless.

 Hans> One thing that struck me is the defaults for word scoring. They
 Hans> cause scores to increase of decrease at an incredible rate,
 Hans> making all scores useless. I've changed the scores to -1 and 1,
 Hans> and this seems to work much better. I also think that line
 Hans> scoring is more important than word scoring (i.e. word scoring
 Hans> to extrapolate to subjects which have not been scored yet), so
 Hans> setting the word scores to some small number makes much more
 Hans> sense than the current defaults.

(I think I've already suggested this once:) IMHO word-scoring should
derive it's scores from the normal adaptive (line-)scores (by deviding
the line-score by the number of words in the subject). So if killed
articles would get -50 for their subject, words from the subject
should be scored with -50/(number of words) each (ignored words are
not include in this count). In this way, word-scoring mimics the
effects for line-scoring for single subjects, but has the intended
side-effects on others. Furthermore, the scores would by a magnitude
smaller than the line-scores, giving the latter priority.

	Robbe