I was reading a book about GHDB and i faced this:
intitle:index.of
results:36,000
intitle:"index of"
results:18,000
so , what does dot character mean in search ?
Most characters outside of the standard a-z,A-z,0-9 are ignored by Google search. The single period, '.', is one of them. In GMail search however, a single period acts as a wildcard catch-all term, so for example searching 'color.' would return mails with 'color' and, for example, mails with 'colorful' or 'colorless' in them too.
You can find more about Google Search Operators here, though this is not a typical question for Stack Overflow.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Regular expression to stop at first match
(9 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I have this gigantic ugly string:
J0000000: Transaction A0001401 started on 8/22/2008 9:49:29 AM
J0000010: Project name: E:\foo.pf
J0000011: Job name: MBiek Direct Mail Test
J0000020: Document 1 - Completed successfully
I'm trying to extract pieces from it using regex. In this case, I want to grab everything after Project Name up to the part where it says J0000011: (the 11 is going to be a different number every time).
Here's the regex I've been playing with:
Project name:\s+(.*)\s+J[0-9]{7}:
The problem is that it doesn't stop until it hits the J0000020: at the end.
How do I make the regex stop at the first occurrence of J[0-9]{7}?
Make .* non-greedy by adding '?' after it:
Project name:\s+(.*?)\s+J[0-9]{7}:
Using non-greedy quantifiers here is probably the best solution, also because it is more efficient than the greedy alternative: Greedy matches generally go as far as they can (here, until the end of the text!) and then trace back character after character to try and match the part coming afterwards.
However, consider using a negative character class instead:
Project name:\s+(\S*)\s+J[0-9]{7}:
\S means “everything except a whitespace and this is exactly what you want.
Well, ".*" is a greedy selector. You make it non-greedy by using ".*?" When using the latter construct, the regex engine will, at every step it matches text into the "." attempt to match whatever make come after the ".*?". This means that if for instance nothing comes after the ".*?", then it matches nothing.
Here's what I used. s contains your original string. This code is .NET specific, but most flavors of regex will have something similar.
string m = Regex.Match(s, #"Project name: (?<name>.*?) J\d+").Groups["name"].Value;
I would also recommend you experiment with regular expressions using "Expresso" - it's a utility a great (and free) utility for regex editing and testing.
One of its upsides is that its UI exposes a lot of regex functionality that people unexprienced with regex might not be familiar with, in a way that it would be easy for them to learn these new concepts.
For example, when building your regex using the UI, and choosing "*", you have the ability to check the checkbox "As few as possible" and see the resulting regex, as well as test its behavior, even if you were unfamiliar with non-greedy expressions before.
Available for download at their site:
http://www.ultrapico.com/Expresso.htm
Express download:
http://www.ultrapico.com/ExpressoDownload.htm
(Project name:\s+[A-Z]:(?:\\w+)+.[a-zA-Z]+\s+J[0-9]{7})(?=:)
This will work for you.
Adding (?:\\w+)+.[a-zA-Z]+ will be more restrictive instead of .*
This question already has answers here:
Regular expression to stop at first match
(9 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I have this gigantic ugly string:
J0000000: Transaction A0001401 started on 8/22/2008 9:49:29 AM
J0000010: Project name: E:\foo.pf
J0000011: Job name: MBiek Direct Mail Test
J0000020: Document 1 - Completed successfully
I'm trying to extract pieces from it using regex. In this case, I want to grab everything after Project Name up to the part where it says J0000011: (the 11 is going to be a different number every time).
Here's the regex I've been playing with:
Project name:\s+(.*)\s+J[0-9]{7}:
The problem is that it doesn't stop until it hits the J0000020: at the end.
How do I make the regex stop at the first occurrence of J[0-9]{7}?
Make .* non-greedy by adding '?' after it:
Project name:\s+(.*?)\s+J[0-9]{7}:
Using non-greedy quantifiers here is probably the best solution, also because it is more efficient than the greedy alternative: Greedy matches generally go as far as they can (here, until the end of the text!) and then trace back character after character to try and match the part coming afterwards.
However, consider using a negative character class instead:
Project name:\s+(\S*)\s+J[0-9]{7}:
\S means “everything except a whitespace and this is exactly what you want.
Well, ".*" is a greedy selector. You make it non-greedy by using ".*?" When using the latter construct, the regex engine will, at every step it matches text into the "." attempt to match whatever make come after the ".*?". This means that if for instance nothing comes after the ".*?", then it matches nothing.
Here's what I used. s contains your original string. This code is .NET specific, but most flavors of regex will have something similar.
string m = Regex.Match(s, #"Project name: (?<name>.*?) J\d+").Groups["name"].Value;
I would also recommend you experiment with regular expressions using "Expresso" - it's a utility a great (and free) utility for regex editing and testing.
One of its upsides is that its UI exposes a lot of regex functionality that people unexprienced with regex might not be familiar with, in a way that it would be easy for them to learn these new concepts.
For example, when building your regex using the UI, and choosing "*", you have the ability to check the checkbox "As few as possible" and see the resulting regex, as well as test its behavior, even if you were unfamiliar with non-greedy expressions before.
Available for download at their site:
http://www.ultrapico.com/Expresso.htm
Express download:
http://www.ultrapico.com/ExpressoDownload.htm
(Project name:\s+[A-Z]:(?:\\w+)+.[a-zA-Z]+\s+J[0-9]{7})(?=:)
This will work for you.
Adding (?:\\w+)+.[a-zA-Z]+ will be more restrictive instead of .*
Lets say an internet user searches for "trouble with gmail".
How can I return entries with "problem|problems|issues|issue|trouble|troubles with gmail|googlemail|google mail"?
I don't like to manually add these linkings between different keywords so the links between "issue <> problem <> trouble" and "gmail <> googlemail <> google mail" are completly unknown. They should be found in an automated process.
Approach to solve the problem
I provide a synonyms/thesaurus plattform like thesaurus.com, synonym.com, etc. or use an synomys database/api and use this user generated input for my queries on a third website.
But this won't cover all synonyms like the "gmail"-example.
Which other options do I have? Maybe something based on the given data and logged search phrases of the past?
You have to think of it ignoring the language.
When you show a baby the same thing using two words, he understand that those words are synonym. He might not have understood perfectly, but he will learn when this is repeated.
You type "problem with gmail".
Two choices:
Your search give results: you click on one item.
The system identify that this item was already clicked before when searching for "google mail bug". That's a match, and we will call it a "relative search".
Your search give poor results:
We will search in our history for a matching search:
We propose : "do you mean trouble with yahoo mail? yes/no". You click no, that's a "no match". And we might propose others suggestions like a list of known "relative search" or a list of might be related playing with both full text search in our history and levenshtein distance.
When a term is sufficiently scored to be considered as a "synonym", you can consider it is. Algorithm might be wrong, but in fact it depends on what you really expect.
If i search "sending a message is difficult with google", and "gmail issue", nothing is synonym, but search are relatively the same. This is more important to me than true synonyms.
And if you really want to get the synonym, i would do it in a second phase comparing words inside "relative searches" and would include a manual check.
I think google algorithm use synonym mainly to highlight search terms in page result, but not to do an actual search where they use the relative search terms, except in known situations, as the result for "gmail" and "google mail" are not the same.
But if you identify 10 relative searches for "gmail" which all contains "google mail", that will be a good start point to guess they are synonyms.
This is a bit long for a comment.
What you are looking for is called a "thesaurus" or "synonyms" list in the world of text searching. Apparently, there is a proposal for such functionality in MySQL. It is not yet implemented. (Here is a related question on Stack Overflow, although the link in the question doesn't seem to work.)
The work-around would be to modify queries before sending them to the database. That is, parse the query into words, then look up all the synonyms for those words, and reconstruct the query. This works better for the natural language searches than the boolean searches (which require more careful reconstruction).
Pseudo-code for getting the final word list with synonyms would be something like:
select #finalwords = concat_ws(' ', group_concat(synonyms separator ' ') )
from synonyms s
where find_in_set(s.baseword, #words) > 0;
Seems to me that you have two problems on your hands:
Lemmatisation, which breaks words down into their lemma, sometimes called the headword or root word. This is more difficult than Stemming, as it doesn't just chop suffixes off of words, but tries to find a true root, e.g. "are" => "be". This is something that is often done programatically, although it appears to be a complex task. Here is an online example of text being lemmatized: http://lemmatise.ijs.si/Services
Searching for synonymous lemmas. This is a very complex problem. One approach to this that I have heard of is modifying the lemmatisation engine to return more than one lemma for a given set of words, i.e. "problems" => "problem" and "issue", thereby allowing a more flexible set of results. However, this means that the synonymous lemmas must be provided to the lemmatisation engine from elsewhere. I truly have no idea how you would build a list of synonyms programatically.
So, you may consider a strategy whereby you lemmatise the text to be searched for, then pass each lemma out to your synonym finder (however that works) to get a final list of lemmas to perform your search with.
I think you have bitten off a very large problem for yourself.
If the system in question is a publicly accessible website, one 'out there' option is to ensure all content can be crawled by Google and then use a Google search on your own site, which should give you the synonym capability 'for free'. There would obviously be some vagaries in the results though and lag in getting match results for newly created content, depending upon how regularly the crawlers hit the site. Probably not suitable in your use case, but for some people, this may be sufficient.
Seeing your revised question, what about using a public API?
http://www.programmableweb.com/category/reference/apis?category=20066&keyword=synonym
I am currently working on a form and am stuck on a keyword/tag input field (think youtube.. or even stackoverflow). Anyway, I thought it was pretty logical to use ',' to separate the tags... which would allow users to use combinations of words as tags using ' '. However my boss wants it separated with just ' '. Which worries me as I think we will end up with millions of 'The' tags. Personally I like the tag system used here on stackoverflow... but its not up to me.
So far my only idea was to have a list of common words that would automatically be removed.... problem being is its an international site, so not much good making a list of English words.
Any ideas?
As the user is typing in the keywords show a preview of the matched keywords right below. This might help clarify to the user that each word separated by spaces is a distinct keyword and that duplicates are eliminated.
Enter keywords: [[[ the house the boat the cat the coat ]]]
Keyword preview: [the] [house] [boat] [cat] [coat]
*** Warning: Duplicate keywords found. To combine multiple words use a "-"
If you really can't convince your boss otherwise, I can only think of your dictionary idea coupled with scheduled maintenance. So, if you notice a word repeatedly being used, such as an equivalent of 'the', then you can blacklist it and remove it from current tags. Also, you could make it clear that words such as 'the' are not required and other words should be hyphenated (as is on SO).
How can I recognize when a user has missed a space when entering a search term? For example, if the user enters "usbcable", I want to search for "usb cable". I'm doing a REGEX search in MySQL to match full words.
I have a table with every term used in a search, so I know that "usb" and "cable" are valid terms. Is there a way to construct a WHERE clause that will give me all the rows where the term matches part of the string?
Something like this:
SELECT st.term
FROM SearchTerms st
WHERE 'usbcable' LIKE '%' + st.term + '%'
Or any other ideas?
Text Segmentation is a part of Natural Language Processing, and is what you're looking for in this specific example. It's used in search engines and spell checkers, so you might have some luck with example source code looking at open source spell checkers and search engines.
Spell checking might be the correct paradigm to consider anyway, as you first need to know whether it's a legitimate word or not before trying to pry it apart.
-Adam
Posted in the comments, but I thought it important to bring up as an answer:
Does that query not work? – Simon Buchan
Followed by:
Well, I should've tested it before I
posted. That query does not work, but
with a CONCAT it does, like so: WHERE
'usbcable' LIKE Concat('%', st.term,
'%'). I think this is the simplest,
and most relevant (specific to my
site), way to go. – arnie0674
Certainly far easier than text segmentation for this application...
-Adam