Re: New user and question

RW <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.mail.bogofilter.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 16:03:32 -0400
Thomas Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 10/25/2010 12:51 PM, Doug wrote:
> > I am new to Bogofilter. Had been using Spam Assassin for years and
> > wanted to try

You might want to try scoring Bogofilter into SpamAssassin, setting it
for multiple word tokenization, so that it complements SpamAssassin's
Bayes. I find that although Bogofilter (multiple word) and Bayes both FP
occasionally they tend to do it on different mails, so it's legitimate
to have both.

I do something similar (I use DSPAM too), and I find that those that
Bogofilter classifies as unsure usually pick-up enough SA points to get
caught easily.

> > My problem is the unsure's are not going down and the majority of
> > them have Viagra in the subject. It is not obfuscated in any way.
> > I see few if any Viagra emails in the spam mail.  Am I doing
> > something wrong? I have probably feed several hundred or more
> > unsure's like this so far. Is there a way to strongly add a word.
> 
> I recommend training to exhaustion.  That is, when a false positive, 
> false negative, or unsure shows up, first you train it, then you
> check it again as if the same exact email arrived another time, and
> if it still doesn't classify correctly, train it again -- repeat
> until it classifies correctly.

In my my experience that's ineffective with default settings because the
influence of new hapaxes and low-count tokens virtually guarantees
correct identification on the second test - unless you use a very large
value of "robs" that would be unsuitable for normal classification. It
makes more difference if you do it iteratively on corpora. 
_______________________________________________
Bogofilter mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.bogofilter.org/mailman/listinfo/bogofilter
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.