MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099396986 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2011.6030477

Spam detection system: A new approach based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets

2011· article· en· W2099396986 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSpammingInterval (graph theory)Filter (signal processing)Fuzzy logicFuzzy control systemData miningSet (abstract data type)The InternetFuzzy setForum spamArtificial intelligenceSpambotMachine learningWorld Wide WebMathematicsComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid growth of the internet users and their use of email on one hand and the exponential increase of unsolicited users sending spam have made the email system unreliable. There are several intelligent anti spam systems which use different AI techniques to filter out spam including Neural Networks and Fuzzy Logic systems. This paper presents a spam detection system based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Obtained results demonstrate the potentials of interval type-2 fuzzy set as an effective technique in spam detection and email classification. The proposed system also enables the user to have more control over the various categories of spam and permits the personalization of the spam filter.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpam and Phishing DetectionFrench-language works237,207