Testing fisher

[David Relson]

At 08:15 AM 1/29/03, Boris 'pi' Piwinger wrote:

>Greg Louis wrote:
>
> > I note that your totals have grown; one improbable but not impossible
> > artefact could be that you've introduced a bunch of hard spams in the
> > most recent batch.
>
>This is unlikely, since I just added the normal flow of mail.
>
> > Trouble is, I can't think of a mechanism by which raising robx, in the
> > absence of any other parameter changes, could lower resulting
> > spamicities.  Any chance you could repeat the experiment, just for
> > 0.025, 0.020 and 0.015, with the exact same training db and message
> > corpora, with both robx values?  We could be onto something big here.
>
>I can with the same training set. The bogofilter database is
>constantly updating, though. If you also want to avoid this,
>I could make a copy of those and freeze it this way.
>
>pi

Taking a snapshot at the start of a test sequence is a good thing to do.