Comment 5 for bug 1796176

Since this was nearly the last bug I filed before leaving MassLNC, I guess it makes sense that it is also one of the first I comment on now that I'm back in the community. IMO, the activity metric feature is the best method available for Evergreen sites to improve their search relevance, and I worry that it is underutilized, possibly because it doesn't work as well as it could.

Since this bug has been gathering dust for the last five years, I'm assuming nobody has taken up the very large project to create badge groups that would provide a calculation that will meet all anticipated use cases.

Therefore, I would like to propose that the current calculation should reflect how the majority of Evergreen sites are currently using their badges. My reasoning is that if we are sticking with just one method of calculating these badges, somebody is going to get inferior search results. With the current method of calculation, sites like CW MARS and NOBLE are getting inferior search results because we apply scores to the full set of bibliographic records, which was the intention behind the original development project.

It's quite possible that if we reach out to other sites, we'll find the vast majority of Evergreen sites using the activity metric badges are using it in the same way that CW MARS and NOBLE are. If that's the case, wouldn't it be better to change the calculation to meet the needs of the predominant use case? Then, if a site decides to develop the patron and staff rating badges as suggested by Mike, the onus will be on that group to develop the more flexible calculation that can meet a greater number of use cases.

NOBLE has been using the code from Michele's branch for five years now and is very happy with the way it calculates scores. We are willing to do the legwork to reach out to the community to see how it's being used at other sites.