RANKING of L4.0 library resources

Can anyone explain ranking to me?

For example, if I enter "Bible Dictionary" into the library search field, I get a long list of resources arranged in alphabetical order and a ranking of resources that puzzles me - it seems to bear no relationship to prioritizing.

If I click VIEW a couple of times I get a list in order of rank but Easton's, Tyndale's & Harpers Bible dictionaries, that I have not even prioritized, are ranked 1-3 respectively. Conversely, resources that I have prioritized appear further down the list in an order that does not correlate with priority. How is Easton's BD assigned a ranking of 1??

I would appreciate some gentle instruction in the ways of Logos!

Thanks, Brian

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

spitzerpl

I would love to have Logos verify this but I believe the ranking in the Library is Logos' default prioritization. It is overridden by the user prioritization, but not changed. so for the resources that are not prioritized the Library ranking number is the number used to determine the order they appear in.

spitzerpl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55579#Comment_55579

Then again if I were right you would expect the ESV to be the highest ranked Bible and its not, its somewhere in the middle of the list and the NET is on top. In that case I'm perplexed as well.

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55580#Comment_55580

Actually I'm pretty sure it's based on the number of hits the search words get in all the metadata fields for the resource (title, subject, author, description,etc). Plus isn't the default prioritization alphabetical (aside from the preferred bible)?

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55589#Comment_55589

Ranking is how relevant the search is. Searches in the Library often return many results. (For example, typing bible dictionary in my library returns 66 results). You wouldn't want Google to return searches in alphabetical order, so neither do you want Logos to do so in the Library. If I sort by rank my first three returns are 'proper' Bible dictionaries. That's what I want.

Quite what the ranking criteria is I'm not sure, but titles rank higher than descriptions, and resources where your search terms apepar as phrases seem to rank higher too. It doesn't take appear to take into consideration any prioritising you have done, nor whether you have 'starred' them.

spitzerpl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55684#Comment_55684

Ranking is how relevant the search is. Searches in the Library often return many results. (For example, typing bible dictionary in my library returns 66 results). You wouldn't want Google to return searches in alphabetical order, so neither do you want Logos to do so in the Library. If I sort by rank my first three returns are 'proper' Bible dictionaries. That's what I want.

Quite what the ranking criteria is I'm not sure, but titles rank higher than descriptions, and resources where your search terms apepar as phrases seem to rank higher too. It doesn't take appear to take into consideration any prioritising you have done, nor whether you have 'starred' them.

He's asking about the ranking column in the library, not the rating sort order in search results.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55690#Comment_55690

He's asking about the ranking column in the library, not the rating sort order in search results.

He's asking about the ranking column in library search results, which is what I'm referring to.

Ronald Quick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55715#Comment_55715

I would also like to know how the ranking works.

spitzerpl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55715#Comment_55715

He's asking about the ranking column in library search results, which is what I'm referring to.

Oh, sorry, I see what your saying know. I never checked before but this number changes with each filter then?

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55819#Comment_55819

I never checked before but this number changes with each filter then?

Yes, it does. Indeed it only appears when you do a search.

Fred Greco

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/56059#Comment_56059

The ranking system is very confusing to me. In at least one instance, it results in a complete error:

BHS w/ 3.5 Morphology is ranked higher than BHS w/ 4.2 Morphology. I can imagine a reason why the BHS w/ Vrije Morphology would rank higher than Westminster (even if I would disagree), but I can't imagine why an older version of a Morphology would outrank a newer.

Any help, Logos?

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/59197#Comment_59197

The ranking applies to how similar the result is to your search terms. It's a relevancy ranking, not a quality ranking. I suspect that because they all mention "BHS" the same number of times in the title/short title/description, the resource that has BHS as the greatest percentage of it's title/short title/description gets ranked higher. As the 'old' BHS has a shorter description, the word BHS make up 5% of its description (wild estimate), whilst with the newer resources its only about 2%. That makes Logos consider the old BHS as more relevant to a search on the word BHS.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/55684#Comment_55684

Ranking is how relevant the search is. Searches in the Library often return many results.

A search of "infant baptism" returns two resources under Monographs;
Ranked 2: Baptism: Its Purpose, Practice and Power by Green, Michael
Ranked 1: Infant Baptism in Historical Perspective by Wright, David F.

They are listed alphabetically by title. The ranking chose the second resource because the search terms are in the title. The first resource has content on "infant baptism" but no direct hit in the title. I do not know what the weighted values are in the search criteria. When you run a search with many hits, you will definitely see a pattern in their rankings. You will also get the occassional "Why in the world is this one here?" hit. I'm sure some of the determining factors are number of occurances, direct hits, and possibly TOC and index references. Some may be weighted by the percentage of hits withing the resource. (A 2 page article of 500 words that has the search term repeated 14 times may look more relevant than a 600 page book with 60 pages devoted to the search topic.) It is all very interesting. One thing is for sure. Logos has a very effective search engine.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/59662#Comment_59662

When you search for a resource in the Library tab, it is only search resource metadata, that is data about the resource. It does not search the resource itself, nor (I'm pretty sure) the table of contents. It's basically searching the data you can see in the library view if you were in the 'grid view', had all the columns visible, and were showing the information panel. There is one exception. It doesn't search the place of publication, despite that showing in the information view.

You can change the sort order by clicking in the titles of the columns. It is usually best to sort by ranking.

In the example you give "infant baptism" appears in the description of the resource.

Fred Greco

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/59739#Comment_59739

But isn't it the case that Ranking serves to "prioritize" resources unless you do that manually? And if so, then I thought Logos was going to set 4.0 up so it would work "out of the box" and would not require extensive prioritizing. I really don't want to have to prioritize everything in my library to get it to work properly. I though Logos was going to (or had) put some thought into this.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/59739#Comment_59739

When you search for a resource in the Library tab, it is only search resource metadata, that is data about the resource. It does not search the resource itself, nor (I'm pretty sure) the table of contents. It's basically searching the data you can see in the library view if you were in the 'grid view', had all the columns visible, and were showing the information panel. There is one exception. It doesn't search the place of publication, despite that showing in the information view.

I thought it was searching the indices. I guess we have to wait for Logos 5.0 for that comprehensive of a search. (Come to think of it, such a detailed search would be returning a whole lot more hits from my library than the two listed. [co] I DO have Portfolio edition, Praise God!))

SteveF

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/59741#Comment_59741

But isn't it the case that Ranking serves to "prioritize" resources unless you do that manually?

Sorry, NO.

I really don't want to have to prioritize everything in my library to get it to work properly.

Sorry again (really)

Logos has put thought into some of this stuff but Ranking and Rating (stars) really need to be re-thought.

Regards

Steve F

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/59872#Comment_59872

The whole purpose of ranking to to show us the resources that most closely match the search terms that we type in. That's what it does. It's a great improvement over Logos 3 which didn't do that. It doesn't take into consideration prioritisation, so nothing needs to be set-up in order for it to work. I don't understand what the problem is.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/59741#Comment_59741

But isn't it the case that Ranking serves to "prioritize" resources unless you do that manually? And if so, then I thought Logos was going to set 4.0 up so it would work "out of the box" and would not require extensive prioritizing. I really don't want to have to prioritize everything in my library to get it to work properly. I though Logos was going to (or had) put some thought into this.

If we all wanted Logos to work the same way, there wouldn't be so many requests for additional customizable features. Logos has developed a product that is quite usable out of the box, but still can require extensive customization to meet inidivual requirements. There is a bit of prioritization that you need to do - top 5 Bibles, top 5 commentaries, top 5 Greek dictionaries etc. Depending upon your particular work habits, you may wish to set up collections that you use to limit the range of a search. I'm not even sure that you could prioritize everthing in you library - but to do so would be a waste of time. With your top 5, collections and Logos 4's rankings serve to place the more valueable matches at the front of the results.