34 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
34 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
Return-Path: anthony@interlink.com.au
|
|
Delivery-Date: Sat Sep 7 04:50:37 2002
|
|
From: anthony@interlink.com.au (Anthony Baxter)
|
|
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2002 13:50:37 +1000
|
|
Subject: [Spambayes] understanding high false negative rate
|
|
In-Reply-To: <15737.16782.542869.368986@slothrop.zope.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <200209070350.g873obE20720@localhost.localdomain>
|
|
|
|
|
|
>>> Jeremy Hylton wrote
|
|
> Then I tried a dirt simple tokenizer for the headers that tokenize the
|
|
> words in the header and emitted like this "%s: %s" % (hdr, word).
|
|
> That worked too well :-). The received and date headers helped the
|
|
> classifier discover that most of my spam is old and most of my ham is
|
|
> new.
|
|
|
|
Heh. I hit the same problem, but the other way round, when I first
|
|
started playing with this - I'd collected spam for a week or two,
|
|
then mixed it up with randomly selected messages from my mail boxes.
|
|
|
|
course, it instantly picked up on 'received:2001' as a non-ham.
|
|
|
|
Curse that too-smart-for-me software. Still, it's probably a good
|
|
thing to note in the documentation about the software - when collecting
|
|
spam/ham, make _sure_ you try and collect from the same source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Anthony Baxter <anthony@interlink.com.au>
|
|
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
|
|
|