Date: 2004-08-06T13:50:15
Editor: JustinMason <jm@jmason.org>
Wiki: SpamAssassin Wiki
Page: BayesAccuracy
URL: http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesAccuracy
adding a page hyping our bayes
New Page:
= How Accurate is SpamAssassin's Bayes implementation? =
[http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~gvcormac/spamcormack.html This paper], by Gordon Cormack and Thomas Lynam of the University of Waterloo, details tests performed to measure accuracy rates of various open-source spam filters.
It compares the various modes of using SpamAssassin's Bayes implementation, then compares SpamAssassin's Bayes against other popular open source pure-learning spam filters (Bogofilter, Spambayes, SpamProbe, DSPAM, and CRM-114). SpamAssassin consistently does well, and is among the lowest in false positives (as of the July 1 2004 revision).
See page 12, 'Classification Performance - Pure Learning Filters', in particular.
Editor: JustinMason <jm@jmason.org>
Wiki: SpamAssassin Wiki
Page: BayesAccuracy
URL: http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesAccuracy
adding a page hyping our bayes
New Page:
= How Accurate is SpamAssassin's Bayes implementation? =
[http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~gvcormac/spamcormack.html This paper], by Gordon Cormack and Thomas Lynam of the University of Waterloo, details tests performed to measure accuracy rates of various open-source spam filters.
It compares the various modes of using SpamAssassin's Bayes implementation, then compares SpamAssassin's Bayes against other popular open source pure-learning spam filters (Bogofilter, Spambayes, SpamProbe, DSPAM, and CRM-114). SpamAssassin consistently does well, and is among the lowest in false positives (as of the July 1 2004 revision).
See page 12, 'Classification Performance - Pure Learning Filters', in particular.