[Spambayes] Just for fun

[FrançoisGranger]

At 21:30 +0100 15/11/02, in message Re: [Spambayes] Just for fun, Rob 
Hooft wrote:
>Tim Peters wrote:
>>[Jeremy]
>>
>>>Here's how that message scored for me:
>>>    Score: 0.998364543478
>>>
>>>    Clues
>>>    -----
>>>    *H* 0.003146604587
>>>    *S* 0.999875691542
>>
>>
>>Good!  On my tiny still-hapax-driven purely-mistake-based at-home classifier
>>(which is up 79 each of ham and spam trained on) it fared much worse:
>>
>>Spam Score: 0.303213
>>
>>word                                spamprob         #ham  #spam
>>'*H*'                               0.496939            -      -
>>'*S*'                               0.103364            -      -
>
>So that makes 80 in your classifier....
>
>For my one-time-only private-email few-weeks-old too-lazy-to-retrain 
>classifier, this message did 0.88 due to the spambayes ham clues....

In my database traine very badly with onlu some incoming ham and spam it did:

Spam probability: 0.65072156

Clues:

*H*	0.33760104
*S*	0.63904417
content-type:text/plain	0.21812081
x-mailer:none	0.34220907
noheader:date	0.84482759
noheader:to	0.84482759

-- 
Le courrier électronique est un moyen de communication. Les gens devraient
se poser des questions sur les implications politiques des choix (ou non
choix) de leurs outils et technologies.
Pour des courriers propres : http://minilien.com/?IXZneLoID0 - 
http://marc.herbert.free.fr/mail/ http://expita.com/nomime.html