Believe me, if you read back through the archives in... 2003?... the training debate went on ad-infinitum.
I think the original question though, was "I want to train ham as ham and I don't know how to do that easily." I can't answer that question, cause I don't use Outlook (on purpose). Maybe someone can address that. Jesse Pelton wrote: > This is one for the training gurus. You can find a discussion of > various training approaches on the SpamBayes wiki > (http://www.entrian.com/sbwiki/TrainingIdeas). > That said, I'll put my oar in. In general, the recommendation of the > gurus is along the lines of "don't worry, be happy:" as long as you're > getting satisfactory results, just use the training buttons to correct > classification errors. The bottom line is the quality of the results > you're getting; the suggestion to keep the ham:spam ratio close to 1 > is a guideline that seems to help achieve that result. I follow that > approach, and when I notice that I'm getting unsatisfactory results > over a period of time, I just discard my training database and start > over. SpamBayes learns very quickly, so I don't find it worthwhile to > try to tune the database over time. > Another thing to look at is the threshold scores for possible and > certain spam. I've dropped my certain spam threshold somewhat as I've > become more confident in my training data (it's now .70). This means > fewer possible spam messages that I then train as spam, which reduces > the ham:spam imbalance. I'm currently getting good results (>95% > correctly classified) with 53 ham and 171 spam trained on. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Gil Hurlbut > *Sent:* Monday, April 24, 2006 4:35 PM > *To:* spambayes@python.org > *Subject:* Re: [Spambayes] Incremental Training for ham in Outlook Plugin? > > The question addresses the fact that SpamBayes is far better at > classifying ham once it is trained than it is in keeping up with > classifying new spam. I find it necessary to remove many spam messages > until I get to the point where the Manager has far more spam than ham. > Until I hear a recommendation differently, I’m going to get back to a > balance by moving known ham to my Unsure folder and click on “Recover > from Spam” to do the incremental training. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >SpamBayes@python.org >http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes >Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.6/323 - Release Date: 4/24/2006 > > _______________________________________________ SpamBayes@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
