On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 17:00:34 +0200 <salson.uma...@monecam.com> wrote:
> dspam is really complicated! > That is not true. No one forces you to use group support. That group support in DSPAM is very unique. You will hardly find another statistical classifier to offer such functionality wrapped in something so simple as the DSPAM group file. > there is no easier method? > Easier method for what? > > > Cordialement, > > > Samuel SALSON > Prestataire Administrateur Systèmes (PCIDSS) > Pôle Technique/Production Informatique > MONECAM > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Stevan Bajić [mailto:ste...@bajic.ch] > Envoyé : vendredi 30 avril 2010 16:04 > À : dspam-user@lists.sourceforge.net > Objet : Re: [Dspam-user] Global Group Not Training > > On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:48:41 -0400 > Ed Szynaka <szyn...@localnet.com> wrote: > > > Yes that's how the README lists it as well. The only reason I tried the > > variations was to attempt to get the debug to let me know the user would > > also > > check the group. I attempted the group name as the same as the corpus > > username > > to see if it worked similar to merged groups. > > > Merged and shared groups use the groupname for internal processing. > Classification groups don't do anything with the group name. > > > > Mostly I tried the variations because the syntax for merged groups makes > > more > > sense to me. > > > In merged groups that makes sense. Right. In a global group it is completely > different. Let me explain: > groupname:grouptype:groupmember > > groupname is the name of the group > > grouptype is either "merged","shared","shared,managed","inoculation" or > "classification" > > groupmember is a list of members separated by "," > > for classification group (aka: "classification") you can turn the group into > a global group by using a "*" prefixed member name. Doing that transforms the > classification group (aka: classification network) into a global group. > > A normal classification group lists members in the memberlist AND you have to > be one of them to be part of that classification network. > > A global group is active FOR ALL users of the system and the member(s) ("*" > prefixed) in the memberlist is/are used when a user has less than 1000 > innocent messages or 250 spam messages AND the message is either SPAM or HAM > and the confidence is below 65% (aka: 0.65). Then DSPAM will consult the > global group members and query their data to get an score. > > > > I'm still not quite sure what the reasoning (if any) there is > > behind the Global Group name. > > > It is almost like an merged group but only kicking in under certain > conditions. > > > > And the merged group syntax appears to allow for > > adding some users to the group where the Global Groups syntax only allows > > adding > > all users to the group. > > > Yes. That is. GLOBAL = for ALL. > > > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. Merged groups do appear to be doing > > an > > okay job but are less than ideal solution. > > > Why? Can you explain what you find not so good about merged groups? > > > > I'll probably be working on doing a > > second check against the corpus user instead of using the merged group > > today > > since it'll allow me to implement the low confidence corpus check instead > > of > > always merging in the corpus data. > > > Aha. I see. > > > > Again thanks for taking a look at this, > > > Well... it was anyway time to look at it and try to fix that broken thing. > > > > Ed > > > -- > Kind Regards from Switzerland, > > Stevan Bajić > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Dspam-user mailing list > Dspam-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Dspam-user mailing list Dspam-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user
