Confused by duplicate entries in search analysis view

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430057#Comment_430057

Seems to be connected to searching the NASB95 for me - KSJ can you not duplicate the issue?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430066#Comment_430066

Hi Michael

Seems to be connected to searching the NASB95 for me - KSJ can you not duplicate the issue?

I can't reproduce this - see below:

But I seem to remember issues with double counting in NASB95 for lemma searches so there may be some artefact of that here.

Are you running 5.0a or 5.0?

Graham

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430066#Comment_430066

KSJ can you not duplicate the issue?

Apologies, No. Did notice one article included in NASB analysis results for a root search:

Keep Smiling [:)]

Eleanor Emmott

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430091#Comment_430091

I had a similar question and was able to get some help on this thread:

http://community.logos.com/forums/t/60361.aspx

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430066#Comment_430066

Seems to be connected to searching the NASB95 for me - KSJ can you not duplicate the issue?

Michael, I tried to duplicate this and couldn't. What version of the NASB95 are you running?

Here's the version numbers for me.

LLS:1.0.71
2012-11-01T17:07:42Z
NASB95.logos4

RVI:NASBNT
2012-10-11T21:56:53Z
NASBNT.lbsrvi

RVI:NASBOT
2012-11-01T01:47:19Z
NASBOT.lbsrvi

A while back I remember some duplication in the NASB95 because there were some irregularities with the Strong's Number tagging. If you have the same version number as me I would try the command "Rebuild Bible Index" and attempt the search again.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430127#Comment_430127

A while back I remember some duplication in the NASB95 because there were some irregularities with the Strong's Number tagging.

NASB95 is guilty of doubling up results on Strong's searches but not on lemma/root searches.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430127#Comment_430127

What version of the NASB95 are you running?

How can I tell what NASB version I am running. I am running 5.0a for L5

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430277#Comment_430277

How can I tell what NASB version I am running.

From the bottom of the Resource Information page, similar to what Kevin shows.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430127#Comment_430127

If you have the same version number as me I would try the command "Rebuild Bible Index" and attempt the search again.

Kevin - I did have the same version of the NASB so I rebuilt the Bible index and now I am getting the proper results. Thanks so much for all the help guys!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430484#Comment_430484

Kevin - I did have the same version of the NASB so I rebuilt the Bible index and now I am getting the proper results.

It appears that I spoke too soon. When I do a root search for pasko in 1 Peter I now get the proper results, but when I search the entire book using @N OR @V OR @J and then look in analysis view it still duplicates the entires.

When I do a root search for pasko in 1 Peter I get the correct number (17) in ALIGNED view, but when I switch to ANALYSIS the entries double and it lists 33 - the entires double only for the word pasko, not the other forms. The problem does seem to be limited to my NASB95.

I am also frustrated that I cannot seem to post a screen shot - I have tried every format but it tells me "either the site is offline or there an unhandled error occurred" - I am sure I am doing something wrong. I am using Insert Attachments/Media like I have in the past, but I get the error when it uploads.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430502#Comment_430502

Hi Michael

When I do a root search for pasko in 1 Peter I get the correct number (17) in ALIGNED view, but when I switch to ANALYSIS the entries double and it lists 33 - the entires double only for the word pasko, not the other forms. The problem does seem to be limited to my NASB95.

As per the screenshot below I don't see this problem. I do get one extra line (where both the article and noun are shown in 1 Peter 5:9)

I am also frustrated that I cannot seem to post a screen shot - I have tried every format but it tells me "either the site is offline or there an unhandled error occurred" - I am sure I am doing something wrong. I am using Insert Attachments/Media like I have in the past, but I get the error when it uploads.

What size is the screenshot image you are trying to upload?

Graham

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430509#Comment_430509

As per the screenshot below I don't see this problem. I do get one extra line (where both the article and noun are shown in 1 Peter 5:9)

That is so strange - is there a way to delete my NASB and redownload it? Do you think that might solve the problem?

What size is the screenshot image you are trying to upload?

400 x 431 pixels - I have tried png, jpeg, and bmp

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430545#Comment_430545

That is so strange - is there a way to delete my NASB and redownload it? Do you think that might solve the problem?

You can delete it - going through the "hide / restore" process as detailed at http://wiki.logos.com/Hiding_Books (written for L4 but the same principle in L5)

I'm afraid I don't know whether or not it will solve the problem.

400 x 431 pixels - I have tried png, jpeg, and bmp

That should be fine. Just to check you are using the paperclip icon?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430545#Comment_430545

That is so strange - is there a way to delete my NASB and redownload it? Do you think that might solve the problem?

Hide the NASB, restart Logos, let it index. Unhide NASB let it redownload and re-index.

The duplication of the result in 1 Pet 5:9 is expected because the article/word combination is aligned under one English word

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430551#Comment_430551

The duplication of the result in 1 Pet 5:9 is expected because the article/word combination is aligned under one English word

Kevin - Yes I expected the duplication in 1 Peter 5:9 - thanks.

I will try to hide and redownload and see if that works.

Posting images - I am using the paper clip icon. I get the same error in Chrome and Safari = "Either the site is offline or an unhandled error occurred. We apologize and have logged the error. Please try your request again or if you know who your site administrator is let them know too."

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430560#Comment_430560

Hide NASB, restarted and reindexed. Unhide NASB, restarted and reindexed - no change - same problem as before. Can anyone give me more advice? I have the same issue in the Windows version of L5 with the NASB. The way it is Analysis is unusable.

I was finally able to upload a screen using Windows.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430641#Comment_430641

Hi Michael

I was finally able to upload a screen using Windows.

Thanks for the screenshot - very helpful.

I'm sorry but I can't come up with any explanation for this. When I replicate your steps I get the expected results as below:

Hopefully someone else will have some good ideas

Graham

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/430874#Comment_430874

Thanks for looking at it Graham. Any suggestions at all? No one seems to be able to offer a solution and if I cannot trust the counts given in these types of searches the searches are useless.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431104#Comment_431104

Thanks for looking at it Graham. Any suggestions at all? No one seems to be able to offer a solution and if I cannot trust the counts given in these types of searches the searches are useless.

Hi Michael

I think there must be something wrong with your installation as this search should work correctly.

I suggest contacting Logos customer services, referencing this thread, and ask them to connect to your system so see if they can work out what is going on.

Graham

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431104#Comment_431104

Thanks for looking at it Graham. Any suggestions at all? No one seems to be able to offer a solution and if I cannot trust the counts given in these types of searches the searches are useless.

Do you highlight your NASB95? When I was looking over the issue again I noticed that one one of the columns was highlights. So I applied two highlights to one of the "suffering" examples and was able to create an additional line for that verse (and increasing the count respectively)

I also suggest enabling all the columns then click the reference so that you can compare each row to see how they differ from each other.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431107#Comment_431107

Thanks for looking at it Graham. Any suggestions at all? No one seems to be able to offer a solution and if I cannot trust the counts given in these types of searches the searches are useless.

Do you highlight your NASB95? When I was looking over the issue again I noticed that one one of the columns was highlights. So I applied two highlights to one of the "suffering" examples and was able to create an additional line for that verse (and increasing the count respectively)

I also suggest enabling all the columns then click the reference so that you can compare each row to see how they differ from each other.

Hi Kevin - I think you are on the right track, well done.

Michael - can you post a screenshot showing all of the columns which you have displayed?

Graham

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431112#Comment_431112

Thanks for looking at it Graham. Any suggestions at all? No one seems to be able to offer a solution and if I cannot trust the counts given in these types of searches the searches are useless.

Do you highlight your NASB95? When I was looking over the issue again I noticed that one one of the columns was highlights. So I applied two highlights to one of the "suffering" examples and was able to create an additional line for that verse (and increasing the count respectively)

I also suggest enabling all the columns then click the reference so that you can compare each row to see how they differ from each other.

Hi Kevin - I think you are on the right track, well done.

+1 [Y] as personally learned one highlight does not increase analysis count, but 2 or more for the same word does increase count:

Sorting by reference places analysis lines together so can look at columns for what is different between the lines.

Keep Smiling [:)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431107#Comment_431107

Do you highlight your NASB95? When I was looking over the issue again I noticed that one one of the columns was highlights. So I applied two highlights to one of the "suffering" examples and was able to create an additional line for that verse (and increasing the count respectively)

I also suggest enabling all the columns then click the reference so that you can compare each row to see how they differ from each other.

Great catch Kevin! [:D][:D] - I do a number of different things with highlighting and the NASB is my primary study version. The duplications show two different highlighters!

I am still not able to post images to this forum from my MAC (see earlier in this thread). I will port over to Windows and try to add the screenshot from there.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431149#Comment_431149

Well done Kevin

Good thinking, Graham

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431187#Comment_431187

Thank you too Graham for investing your time to help me. I really appreciate it gentleman!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431149#Comment_431149

You're welcome Michael. This is indeed an example where I could imagine it would be nice to have the option to either include or exclude Highlights from influencing the number of rows/results.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431265#Comment_431265

You're welcome Michael. This is indeed an example where I could imagine it would be nice to have the option to either include or exclude Highlights from influencing the number of rows/results.

Exclude, preferably.