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
