Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[BUG] Explain API not compatible with k-NN queries #875

Open
SeyedAlirezaFatemi opened this issue Apr 20, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

[BUG] Explain API not compatible with k-NN queries #875

SeyedAlirezaFatemi opened this issue Apr 20, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
backlog Enhancements Increases software capabilities beyond original client specifications

Comments

@SeyedAlirezaFatemi
Copy link

What is the bug?
The Explain API is not compatible with k-NN queries and assumes they have a score of 1. Well, I don't think there is a useful explanation to be given for k-NN queries, but when you have multiple k-NN queries or k-NN queries combined with text match queries, knowing the score of each k-NN part individually can be helpful.

How can one reproduce the bug?
Just make a k-NN query and set the explain flag to true.

What is the expected behavior?
Just have the score of the k-NN part correctly as the value field in the explanation.

Do you have any screenshots?
image

@SeyedAlirezaFatemi SeyedAlirezaFatemi added bug Something isn't working untriaged labels Apr 20, 2023
@navneet1v
Copy link
Collaborator

@SeyedAlirezaFatemi could you please let us know what you are looking in the explain api?

@SeyedAlirezaFatemi
Copy link
Author

I don't think there is anything significant in the explain API for kNN queries other than the value. I just need to check the value in case I combine a kNN query with other queries.

image

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backlog Enhancements Increases software capabilities beyond original client specifications
Projects
Status: Backlog (Hot)
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants