Re: Time for my monthly beating again...

[Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


- -1.44 to -0.5?  That's very low!  you must be using a lot of Bayes...

- --j.

Joe Flowers writes:
> Very preliminary results are no less than AWESOME. I'm seeing and people 
> are reporting much higher rates of Spam being caught with no *reports* 
> of an increase in false-positives. We'll see if that continues; the 
> proofs in the pudding. No sign of the dividing line drifting into a wall 
> yet. It seems to be drifting between average SA scores of -1.44 to -0.5 
> instead of being fixed at 5.00 as before. I hope the SA developers will 
> take notice and improve upon the idea.
> 
> Joe
> 
> Joe Flowers wrote:
> 
> > Later today I'll be implementing a "drifting" spam/ham dividing line 
> > (one "line" for the entire system - not individually set per email 
> > account) to see how effective it is or how effective it appears to be.
> >
> > I'm curious to know if the dividing line will drift into a wall on 
> > some self-imposed boundary edge or if it will converge to a point for 
> > us or if it will slowly drift around in circles.
> >
> > I'm "determining" the dividing line by taking the average of all of 
> > the SA hits of all of the messages and changing the dividing line, on 
> > the fly, for each subsequent message.
> >
> > Anyone want to tell me or speculate on how this experiment will end or 
> > what it will tell me, whether I'm listening or not?
> >
> > For us, SA *seems* to score SPAM messages with lower and lower hit 
> > scores as time goes by, and the users get more and more glassy-eyed 
> > over it's ("my" if you prefer) effectiveness as time goes by too.
> >
> > I've spent a lot of time with the bayesian stuff and sa-learn, but 
> > still it seems to drift downward.
> >
> > And, I have to agree that SA is very good but requires a lot of 
> > attention by someone who knows what they are doing - which, of course, 
> > may or may not be me.
> >
> > Nonetheless, I have this problem before me and am attempting a 
> > possible solution.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> >
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFCFmOBMJF5cimLx9ARAme/AKCxYu4HYU4MJR7TVMuVqnu0nf1mJgCdExin
Kt+W7OTVwi2+2OSkC4e+lvE=
=B1WB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----