On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:02:04AM +0100, KELEMEN Peter wrote: > got 87-88% success rate. My databases were trained with ten times > as many spams and I got lower results. Theoretically, I have two
> b) bogofilter does not trim word lists as ifile does. I didn't > look at the source, but judging fro mthe huge Berkeley DB files it > is the case. Can someone confirm this? If it is true, then we > have a classical over-training case observed with neural nets and > combined probability filters that degrades overall performance. Another possibility: in my experience bogofilter seems to work better when it has seen very much more non-spam than spam e-mail. As I recall your data set was about evenly split between the two. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
