Talk:Naive Bayes spam filtering

message: Do we really need the advert for PopFile?
:POPFile isn't the archetypical Bayesian spam filter. Maybe a specific spam filtering program (such as Spam Bayes or K9) should be mentioned as filter, and POPFile cited as example of the general classification also mentioned in the article. Drangon
I am a POPFile user so I may be biased, but I think that is a good idea to include examples of bayesian filters.  The POPFile link was just removed with the comment "Don't need the advert at the end".  I agree the text was pretty strong in saying it is one of the most popular, but providing the reader some links is a good idea.  Currently the text only mentions Thunderbird as an option.  Programs such as K9, SpamBayes, and POPFile let the user continue to use their current mail client.  Thunderbird is a good program but it is not right for everyone.  And following what Drangon said, POPFile is a good example of how bayesian filtering can be used for more than just spam filtering. JoeChongq 04:45, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  PopFile 

message: I suggest that this page be renamed "bayesian spam filtering" and moved.  As people have pointed out, this article is not about bayesian filters in general, but rather a specific application in spam filtering.  It does have some good info/links for spam filtering, which people are generally interested in, but as an article on "Bayesian Filtering" it could be much broader/technical/better.
* I totally agree, and have now renamed the article to "Bayesian spam filtering". --Fredrik Orderud 13:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An article needs to be balanced only in reference to its scope, and this here is about Bayesian methods only. The current place for comparing spam filtering techniques is Stopping_e-mail_abuse#Examination_of_anti-spam_methods, for Bayes see Stopping_e-mail_abuse#Statistical_filtering.--84.188.179.95 10:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Meanwhile, Bayesian filtering has become a disambiguation page (Bayesian filtering can also mean sequential state estimation). Bayesian filter still redirected here, I now made it redirect to Bayesian filtering (as it was originally). PapaNappa (talk) 14:41, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for Move 

message: Anybody know how this is typically pronounced? Is it BAY-zee-an, or bay-EEZ-yun or by-EEZ-yun, or what?
:I work with programmers from the U.S. (both coasts), France, India, and China.  They all pronounce it bay-EE-sian.  Don't get me started on the French pronouncing SQL as "squirrel". Kainaw 18:05, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is late to the party, but all the statistics types that I know pronounce it "BAY-zee-an" or "BAY-zhun", as it's named after "Bayes", prounounced "bays", not "BAY-ess", "BUY-ez", or other alternatives. 136.251.12.63 18:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation? 

message: BoredAndriod's revision:
Bayesian filtering is the process of using  Bayesian statistics to attempt to remove noise from a corrupted signal.
Bayesian statistics is a paradigm of statistics named for the Rev. Thomas Bayes.  It treats probabilities as estimates of uncertainty and derives methods of statistical inference from decision theory.  Bayesian statistics is a reaction to frequentist statistics which interpretes probabilities as the limiting frequency of events upon infinite repetition of some experiment.
The term Bayesian filtering has lately been used to refer to the naive Bayes algorithm which was invented in the 1960s, but recently made popular by the web posting A Plan for Spam by Paul Graham.  Presumably Graham chose to refer to the naive Bayes classifier as "Bayesian Filtering" due to its use of Bayes' theorem.  This is somewhat confusing, however, as neither Bayes' theorem nor the naive Bayes classifier is necessarily Bayesian.  Both are direct applications of probability theory with no interpretation of what the probabilities mean.''
:I am reverting the article because a lot of material was taken out, uncessarily it would seem, and without any explanation as well as discussion, in short without a word.  This is very bad form but we can see which changes we want to add back in from this article. --ShaunMacPherson 13:24, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I began to address the above problem (that the content of this page should be completely different) at User:Samohyl_Jan/Bayesian_filtering. Anyone is invited to help. Samohyl Jan 08:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: I agree that the SpamBully pointer should go, but I put back the SpamBayes pointer.  It's not a product, it's an open source project.  johndburger 15:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The spam reduction tools are in the article Stopping e-mail abuse. Besides, there already is an article about SpamBayes. The external link is not needed. --Sbluen 22:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: There is a lengthy section on advantages.  Are there any disadvantages?  Shouldn't there be a section on the disadvantages?  The only one I can think of is the process requires "training" the filter for the filter to work well, right?  ~a (user • talk • contribs) 16:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advantages and Disadvantages 

message: I added the part about Jason Rennie's ifile program that was recently deleted. It certainly seems noteworthy to include the first apparent program to implement a Bayesian algorithm for mail filtering. If anybody can source more info on Rennie or this program I think it would help the article. Jkraybill (talk) 15:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ifile

message: The "get external sources !" recommendation of wikipedia sometimes has strange consequences. For example, it is obvious to me (and to any mathematician, I suppose), that if p equals 0 or 1, ln(p) or ln(1 - p) won't be defined. So I'd like to add a sentence saying that the "logarithms" version of the combining formula (which uses both ln(p) and ln(1 - p)) won't work when "sure ham" and "sure spam" indicators are present. But if I add such a remark, it will be my own work, which is forbidden... --MathsPoetry (talk) 19:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This problem is usually solved by Lidstone smoothing. Qwertyus (talk) 15:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  We can't add own reasearch, but... 

message: A lot of this article actually discusses the Naive Bayes classifier and related techniques. I suggest moving a lot of the material there to prevent confusing duplication; in fact, this article could serve as an example section (or running example) of the NBC, or maybe of document classification. Qwertyus (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that noone has replied, I dont think we have concensus to do this. Op47 (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move parts to Naive Bayes article 

message: The advantages section now states:
:One of the main advantages of Bayesian spam filtering is that it can be trained on a per-user basis.
Advantage over what? The same holds true for the linear SVMs that have replaced NB in serious spam filters years ago. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 13:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advantages disputed 

message: The interpretation of the terms in the formula displayed in this section is not consistent with the formulas previously shown. For consistency, it should read that p is the probability that the message is spam given the words it contains, and that p_1, ..., p_n are the likelihoods of seeing each word (w_1, ... w_n) if the message were spam (and NOT the probability that the message is spam given that it contains each of these words independently).
:I agree. This section appears to be disastrously wrong. Perhaps it's because the cited source uses very different set-up and notation. Mgnbar (talk) 14:49, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Combining probabilities section is wrong 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Naive Bayes spam filtering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100929165032/http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/gutsy/man1/sa-learn.1p.html to http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/gutsy/man1/sa-learn.1p.html
*Added  tag to http://bnr.nuclearelephant.com/l
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:43, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)