From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Michael Monnerie wrote:http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/173910/e7bf95a7cb044637/They are wondering why bayes_99 is not given 5 points by default, as it seems to have no FP.Statisticaly speaking, 1% of BAYES_99 hits should be nonspam.In reality, it does a lot better than that. However, in the SA 3.1.0 set3 mass checks it still managed to match about 21 messages in the nonspam test set: OVERALL% SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME 176869 123778 53091 0.700 0.00 0.00 (all messages) 60.712 86.7351 0.0396 1.000 0.90 3.50 BAYES_99 SA's scores aren't based on human assumptions about how the rules behave. They are based on real-world testing and a perceptron score-fitting system that accounts not only for the hit-rate of the rule, but also for the combinations of rules that it tends to match with. Often the reality is a lot more complex than you think.
And of course, when reading BAYES_99 pronouncements one must ALWAYS be
aware that YMMV in big glowing radioactive Cherenkov Radiation Blue
letters is always presumed. Matt's note above proves it.
{^_-}
