Chris Santerre wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Rudd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 10:44 AM
> To: Chris Santerre
> Cc: Sietse van Zanen; SpamAssassin Users
> Subject: Re: SA Score -> Confidence Percentage
>
>
>
> On Jul 26, 2006, at 6:40 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John Rudd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 6:38 AM
> > > To: Sietse van Zanen
> > > Cc: SpamAssassin Users
> > > Subject: Re: SA Score -> Confidence Percentage
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I can see how plugins and add-on rules all affect it, but
> certainly
> > > they have some sort of base comparison that lets them know
> > > when they've
> > > gotten the right score values for the base rules, right?
> >
> > I'm confused by your statement. (I'm also distracted by shiny
> > objects....)
> >
> > When rules scores are formed, they are scored based off a large
> > corpus, additional rules, and set in the very moment they
> are scored.
>
> Yes, that is the corpus I am referring to.
>
> When that score is developed, how is it decided that the scores have
> settled? When a "95% of the spam in the corpus got ranked 5 or
> higher"? 80%? 100%? That's the comparison I'm looking for.
Ahh.... the perceptron. Um... I'm not going to even pretend to tell you I
understand how that mystical piece of code works. Something to do with goats and
planetary alignments.
However, IMHO, the public corpus runs and perceptron are outdated the moment
they are run. I also am one of the few nuts who think the perceptron hurts more
then it helps. I have no data to back that up other then the tingly feeling in
my tummy. And my tummy serves me well. ;)
Hurts more than it helps? Probably not. But it *does* cause weird
things like BAYES_80 being scored higher than BAYES_95.
body Bayesian spam probability is 80 to 95% BAYES_80 0 0 3.608 2.0
body Bayesian spam probability is 95 to 99% BAYES_95 0 0 3.514 3.0
Must have been the goats...
-Jim
