I'm currently facing a challenge in Python where I need to find a specific string (let's call it A) within a much larger string (like a book, which we'll call B). The catch is that string A may not appear in B exactly as it is; instead, I need to do a fuzzy string search because A might be slightly altered or contain typos. Has anyone dealt with a similar issue? I'm looking for methods or approaches that could effectively solve this. Any insights would be greatly appreciated!
5 Answers
You could slice the book into smaller parts and then check each piece for string A. It’s a straightforward approach; what's stopping you from trying this?
Consider a strategy where you look for two exact matching words from string A within B and check their relative positions. Score these matches based on proximity and relevance to find the best fuzzy matches. It might take some tweaking, but it could yield solid results!
You might want to look into using the Levenshtein algorithm, which helps with string comparisons that allow for some variation. It can handle typos and slight changes pretty well. It's a bit complex, but it's worth considering for your problem.
Yeah, I considered Levenshtein too, but it might overly penalize differences in string length. I’m leaning towards using the Sørensen-Dice coefficient instead, even if the runtime might be slow, as I just need a working solution.
Fuzzy matching is about finding non-exact matches. Since B is long, it's easy to miss A, especially if it's altered. Trying the simple check `found = A in B` won't work because of this fuzziness, which is the whole point of your question, right?
Exactly! A isn't guaranteed to exist in B in the same form, so just checking for A isn't effective.
If you're looking for typos or approximate matches, you can explore libraries like `fuzzysearch` or `fuzzywuzzy`. They offer built-in functions tailored for this kind of string comparison, making your job easier!
Thanks for your suggestion! The main issue is that A might be modified between editions, so using strict matching could lead to missing results. I need a more flexible method.