[Feature] Add upper bound parameter for min_max normalization technique

[ryanbogan]

Description

Adds upper bound parameter for min_max normalization technique

Related Issues

Resolves #1210

Check List

• New functionality includes testing.
• New functionality has been documented.
• API changes companion pull request created.
• Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff.
• Public documentation issue/PR created.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

[ryanbogan]

This PR is currently in draft state as I still need to add unit tests for the combination of lower and upper bound score calculations and integration tests for multiple different scenarios.

[martin-gaievski]

Is there a combined bounds test for scenarios with both upper and lower bounds applied simultaneously.

If it's not there please add something like this

@Test
public void testCombinedBounds_whenBothUpperAndLowerBounds_thenSuccessful() {
    Map<String, Object> params = Map.of(
        "lower_bounds", List.of(Map.of("mode", "apply", "min_score", 0.2)),
        "upper_bounds", List.of(Map.of("mode", "apply", "max_score", 0.8))
    );
    // test and assert
}

[ryanbogan]

Is there a combined bounds test for scenarios with both upper and lower bounds applied simultaneously.

If it's not there please add something like this

@Test
public void testCombinedBounds_whenBothUpperAndLowerBounds_thenSuccessful() {
    Map<String, Object> params = Map.of(
        "lower_bounds", List.of(Map.of("mode", "apply", "min_score", 0.2)),
        "upper_bounds", List.of(Map.of("mode", "apply", "max_score", 0.8))
    );
    // test and assert
}

That's one of the cases that I still need to add, described in my comment above. Will add in a future commit

[ryanbogan]

Looking into failing tests

[ryanbogan]

Rebase with main had caused a duplicate lower bounds clause to be added to the test search pipeline during the IT. Fixed now

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 0.00%. Comparing base (24deed2) to head (373524c).

Additional details and impacted files

@@     Coverage Diff      @@
##   main   #1431   +/-   ##
============================
============================

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[martin-gaievski]

Looks good, thank you @ryanbogan

[owaiskazi19]

Looks clean. Few comments

[martin-gaievski]

Looks good, thanks Ryan

[owaiskazi19]

Looks much cleaner with a minor comment

[owaiskazi19]

Looks good. Thanks for addressing comments