http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4089
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-22 21:05 ------- Subject: Re: Micro Bayesian Filters - Phone Numbers > It generally returns the same results ar SAs bayesian filter except when the > don't agree - it's because the second filter is right. > I can post more of the details if I get some interest - but - this works and > it's time to look at bayesian filters differently. And time to think about > multiple filters working on different parts of the message. >From the first statement I would tend to draw a different conclusion than you did. Is it that multiple filters are better than one, or is it that a filter that drops extraneous stuff from its db is better than one that doesn't? You first statement leads to the later conclusion. What happens if you disable Bayes in SA completely and just use your second filter? It sounds like this should improve overall results, since you won't have the occasional SA Bayes error biasing the score in the wrong direction. What I'm getting at here is that maybe the solution isn't multiple filters (although I see nothing inherently wrong with that idea), but maybe the solution is to simply prune the extraneous junk from the input to the main SA Bayes filter so that it works like your add-on filter. You clearly have a script or some such that is able to trim a message down for input to the second filter. How hard would it be to add that filtering as an option in SA to feed the main Bayes routines? ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
