2015 IEEE International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Communication Technologies (ICECCT) 2015
DOI: 10.1109/icecct.2015.7226077
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A survey and evaluation of supervised machine learning techniques for spam e-mail filtering

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Concerning SVM, another popular spam-classification algorithm, it was showed that SVMs are robust to both different datasets and pre-processing techniques [23]. Its superiority to NB, k-NN, decision trees, and MLP approaches was demonstrated is recent comparative studies [45,75,82]. AISs [76] represent another promising method for spam filtering.…”
Section: Spam Filtering Using Machine Learning: a Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Concerning SVM, another popular spam-classification algorithm, it was showed that SVMs are robust to both different datasets and pre-processing techniques [23]. Its superiority to NB, k-NN, decision trees, and MLP approaches was demonstrated is recent comparative studies [45,75,82]. AISs [76] represent another promising method for spam filtering.…”
Section: Spam Filtering Using Machine Learning: a Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ey examined 35 well-known cyber dataset by dividing them into seven categories. ese categories include Internet traffic-based, network trafficbased, Interanet traffic-based, electrical network-based, virtual private network-based, andriod apps-based, IoT Vyas et al [22] present a review on supervised machine learning strategies for filtering spam emails. ey concluded that the Naïve Bayes method provides faster results and decent precision over all other methods (except SVM and ID3) from all the techniques discussed.…”
Section: Comparison With Previous Surveysmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Use Another illegal mail recognition method was suggested by Tarjani Vyas et al [9]. The goal is not only to identify mail as spam or ham, but also to minimize the risk of false positive and false negative.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%