Yet Another Comparison of Lucene and Indri Performance

By Howard R. Turtle, Yatish Hegde, Steven A. Rowe. 2012

21 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Retrieval & Search, Evaluation & Benchmarks

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Retrieval & Search

1. Jimmy J. Lin
2. Rodrigo Nogueira
3. Andrew Yates
4. Zeynep Akkalyoncu Yilmaz
5. Sebastian Hofstätter
6. Allan Hanbury
7. Peilin Yang
8. Wei Yang

In Evaluation & Benchmarks

1. Rodrigo Nogueira
2. Andrew Yates
3. Jimmy J. Lin

Citations in the corpus

• Pretrained Transformers for Text Ranking: BERT and Beyond (2020, methodology): “ions) at a painfully slow pace. For much of its existence, its default ranking model was an ad hoc variant of tf–idf that was demonstrably less effective than ranking models used in academic systems [Turtle et al., 2012]. BM25 was not added to Lucene until 2011,68 nearly two decades after its introd”
• Anserini (2018, background): “For example, Turtle et al. [54] showed that Lucene’s out-of-the-box effectiveness was far worse than Indri’s.”
• From MAXSCORE to Block-Max Wand: The Story of How Lucene Significantly Improved Query Evaluation Performance (2020, background): “For much of its existence, its default ranking model was a variant of TF-IDF that was not only ad hoc, but demonstrably less effective than ranking models that were widely available in academic systems [18] .”