Re: spam / train-spam

k b wrote:
> I'm sure this has been asked before,
> but what is the difference between `spam' and `train-spam' ?
> When should each be used and why?

Not sure I can add much practical information to what the readme says:

FROM THE README:

   The train command tries to minimize the number of database updates by
   only updating the database with terms from an incoming message if
   there was insufficient confidence in the message's score.  The train
   command always updates the database on the first 1500 of each type
   received.  This ensures that sufficient email is classified to allow
   the filter to operate reliably.

   As an alternative to using the train command, you can run spamprobe in
   "receive" mode.  In that mode SpamProbe scores the email and then
   classifies it as either spam or good based on the score.  It always
   automatically adds the word counts for the email to the appropriate
   database.  This is essentially like running in score mode followed
   immediately by either spam or good mode.  It produces more database
   I/O and a bigger database but ensures that every message has its terms
   reflected in the database.  Personally I use train mode.  A sample
   procmailrc file using the receive command looks like this:

In more detail: The "spam" command updates the database with terms from
every message it processes.  The "train-spam" command only updates the
database for a small fraction of messages.  The decision of whether or
not to update the database for a given message is based on how the score
SP calculated for the message.  If the score is dead on (close to 0 for
ham or 1 for spam) then the database isn't updated for that message
since there really isn't any need.


> what is a `difficult' message to classify?

The threshold is about 0.005 for ham and 0.995 for spam.  In my own
experience that seems to result in around 90% of ham and spam not
needing to be added to the database.  There are some other factors
involved but that's the idea.


> Also, Mr Burton, is there any way you could release your source with
> comments intact?

I'm not hiding anything if that's what you're thinking.  The code is
commented where I felt that a comment would add to readability.  I don't
like to have an abundance of redundant comments in the code since they
generally winds up being in the way or wrong.

Are there specific portions of the code that you have a question about?


> Thank you

Your welcome. :-)

All the best,
++Brian



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click