On Saturday 10 January 2004 16:23, Richard Urwin wrote: > On Saturday 10 Jan 2004 3:16 pm, Anne Wilson wrote: > > On Saturday 10 January 2004 14:44, Richard Urwin wrote: > > > If I can get SpamAssassin in it is more > > > powerful. > > > > I have to question that. I know it's better known, but I get far > > better rates under POPFile than I did when I tried SA. POPFile > > functions typically at 99.87% accuracy. I don't think you can > > better that. > > That's a very impressive number, but I don't see what POPFile does > that SA doesn't. You do need to train SA, and it doesn't start > using Bayesian analysis until it's database has 200 messages in. I > don't have any experience of how easy, hard or accurate this bit of > SA is. I run it at work, but the setup precludes training the > Bayesian bit.
I suspect that's the crucial bit. SA must be very capable to keep its good name, but it does take a lot of training. POPFilter, OTOH, seems to train very quickly. I had to re-install a couple of weeks ago, so right now my statistics are Emails classified: 3,457 Classification errors: 15 Accuracy: 99.56% Traffic over the holidays has been predictably light. I would expect this to be back to the 99.87% that I had before Christmas within the next week or so. As you can see, since I reinstalled on 22 Dec it has only made 15 classification errors (most of them in the first 48 hours) - I always correct them immediately, to speed up the learning. Anne -- Registered Linux User No.293302 Have you visited http://twiki.mdklinuxfaq.org yet?
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
