MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139499710

Presenting a Hybrid Feature Selection Method Using Chi2 and DMNB Wrapper for E-Mail Spam Filtering

2013· article· en· W2139499710 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seyed Mostafa Pourhashemi, Alireza Osareh, Bita Shadgar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of academic and applied studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeature selectionSupport vector machineComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceRandom forestPattern recognition (psychology)Word error rateMachine learningFeature extractionInformation gainFilter (signal processing)Data mining
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing volume of spam emails has resulted in the necessity for more accurate and efficient email classification system. The purpose of this research is presenting an machine learning approach for enhancing the accuracy of automatic spam detecting and filtering and separating them from legitimate messages. In this regard, for reducing the error rate and increasing the efficiency, the hybrid architecture on feature selection has been used. Features used in these systems, are the body of text messages. Proposed system of this research has used the combination of two filtering models, Filter and Wrapper, with Information Gain (IG) filter and Support Vector Machine (SVM) wrapper as feature selectors. In addition, MNB classifier, DMNB classifier, SVM classifier and Random Forest classifier are used for classification. Finally, the output results of this classifiers and feature selection methods are examined and the best design is selected and it is compared with another similar works by considering different parameters. The optimal accuracy of the proposed system is evaluated equal to 99%.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of academic and applied studiesSame topicSpam and Phishing DetectionFrench-language works237,207