Re: Result Based on a Single Token
RW <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.bogofilter.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:03:26 -0400 David Relson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 04:35:21 +0100 > RW wrote: > > Like I said, it's not my Bogofilter, it's the filter at > > http://www.tuffmail.com. I've trained on error/unknown for a year, > > and it's had about 250 ham + 350 spam. > > > > Irrespective of how Tuffmail has tuned it, it seems fundamentally > > wrong that any Bayesian spam filter can produce an output of 0.996 > > based on a single token. Shouldn't there be some kind of sanity > > check? > > Hello RW, > > Looking at the "-vvv" output, its apparent tuffmail has configured > bogofilter to ignore tokens with scores between 0.164021 and 0.196600. > This seems a bit extreme. > > Many email clients allow client side filtering, i.e. you can run > bogofilter with _your_ parameters. If I'm reading the mail headers > correctly, you are running Claws Mail 3.0.0 on a FreeBSD machine. > I know that claws-mail allows the client side filtering above. Why > not give it a try? > There are lots of reasons why I prefer having my mail on a remote server, and my spam-filtering server-side, but I don't really want to get into that. Tuffmail's Bogofilter actually does work very well, and the overwhelming majority of spams/hams are identified on a large number of tokens. What bothers me about this is that it's an avoidable false-positive. It arises because the edge-case isn't handled, in which the token-selection rules don't leave enough information for a sensible result. IMO there are two sensible ways of handling this; either tinker with the token selection so it always produces a minimum number of tokens, or simply return 0.5 when there isn't enough information to work with. _______________________________________________ Bogofilter mailing list [email protected] http://www.bogofilter.org/mailman/listinfo/bogofilter