spam cutoff less than neutral?
Boris 'pi' Piwinger
3.14 at logic.univie.ac.at
Tue Feb 24 04:20:06 EST 2004
Tom Anderson <tanderso at oac-design.com> wrote:
>> >Cutoffs by definition ought to be at or outside of
>> >the min_dev range.
>> Not at all.
>> >Else, min_dev should really be changed to be
>> >consistent with your cutoff philosophy.
>> It is absolutely consistent. I still don't get you point.
>If your min_dev is excluding all tokens between 0.35 and 0.75 as being
>unable to influence a ham/spam decision because they are too
>inconclusive, then it follows that a combined ranking within this range
>is also ambiguous.
Why so? What do you think is the combined ranking? It is
*not* something like a weighted product of the token values.
>If a message classification of 0.55 is definitely
>spam, then an individual token ranking 0.55 should also be indicative of
Not at all. For me a *token* is significat below .2 or above
.8. But a message within that interval is all but unsure. I
have a cutoff of .5 and that works very well.
More information about the Bogofilter