Marcin Krol wrote: > Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > > > Did you manually (initially) train it > > with your collected ham and recent (not older than 3 months) spam? > > No, I just waited until default 200 hams and 200 spams kicked it in. > As I mentioned elsewhere, I get a weird effect of correct positives, > but relatively many false negatives from Bayes rules.
Bayes works best when it is manually trained. At the very least, you need to monitor it and retrain any messages that are scored incorrectly. Automatic training is at the mercy of SA's scoring. If SA gets it wrong, Bayes will be trained wrong, which will result in an increase in false positives and false negatives. -- Bowie
