http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4089
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-22 21:53 ------- Subject: Re: Micro Bayesian Filters - Phone Numbers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4089 > > > > >>>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. > > That might end up being true. I don't know if two filters are better than one or not where one looks at everything and the other looks at only the hottests parts. I also wonder if two filters looking at different parts might work better. >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. > > It might - I have yey to try that. >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. > > I think that multiple filters is the solution - in that I think one filter to look at the message - and another filter to look at only the rules triggered for automatic scoring. >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? > > > > Interesting enough I'm not much of a programmer. I kind of gather code and make it work. But - the sharp people here could do it. <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> <br> <br> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a> wrote:<br> <blockquote cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4089";>http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4089</a> </pre> <br> <pre wrap=""><!----> >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. </pre> </blockquote> That might end up being true. I don't know if two filters are better than one or not where one looks at everything and the other looks at only the hottests parts. I also wonder if two filters looking at different parts might work better. <br> <blockquote cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> 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. </pre> </blockquote> It might - I have yey to try that.<br> <blockquote cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> 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. </pre> </blockquote> I think that multiple filters is the solution - in that I think one filter to look at the message - and another filter to look at only the rules triggered for automatic scoring.<br> <blockquote cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> 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? </pre> </blockquote> Interesting enough I'm not much of a programmer. I kind of gather code and make it work. But - the sharp people here could do it.<br> <br> <pre class="moz-signature" cols="80">-- Marc Perkel - <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a> Spam Filter: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.junkemailfilter.com";>http://www.junkemailfilter.com</a> My Blog: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://marc.perkel.com";>http://marc.perkel.com</a> My Religion: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.churchofreality.org";>http://www.churchofreality.org</a> ~ "If it's real - we believe in it!" ~ </pre> </body> </html> ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
