On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> I've already tried spamoracle: I fed it with about 2000 spams and 3000
> good mails and it too often considered good mail as spam.

To add my experience with spamoracle, I use it on a regular basis and am
very content with its performance. Of course, this is really a matter
of what kind of e-mail you usually get. It has happened only about
4 times so far (since end of August - I get about 30 mails per day)
that it misclassified admittedly "strange looking" e-mail (no contents,
only attachments). I have trained it using about 1000 spam and 10000
good mails.

Though this is probably quite obvious anyway, I'd like to point out that
it is really important that all of the good and spam mails are the ones
that you have personally received. If you just take any kind of spam or
good mails, performance will definitely suffer.

If you absolutely don't want to miss good mails, you'll have to regularly
look at your spam folder. Even in this case spamoracle is very helpful,
because it decreases total entropy, i.e. makes it easier for you to
classify things with your own eyes.

Regards,
Markus Mottl

-- 
Markus Mottl                                             markus@oefai.at
Austrian Research Institute
for Artificial Intelligence                  http://www.oefai.at/~markus
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners