Spam Detection Using Radial Base Function and Compare the Prediction Accuracy Using Naive Bayes Algorithm

The proposed study aims to detect spam by utilizing the Radial Base Function and comparing the accuracy of predictions with Naive Bayes. Using machine learning techniques like Naive Bayes and Radial Base Function, spam can be detected. In this case, gpower 80% was used for the power analysis, and there are 20 participants in each of the two groups. Spam was detected with an accuracy of 0.93% and 0.96% using the Radial Base Function and Naive Bayes, respectively. To ascertain statistically significant differences, an independent sample t-test was employed, yielding a 2-tailed accuracy of 0.002 (<tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$p&lt;0.05$</tex>). Radial Base Function is outperformed by Naive Bayes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/icetas62372.2024.11119869
Primary Topic
Spam and Phishing Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Spam Detection Using Radial Base Function and Compare the Prediction Accuracy Using Naive Bayes Algorithm

Salim Lahmiri, K. Thinakaran, V. Pranitha, S V Rajabalaji
Spam and Phishing Detection
article

Spam Detection Using Radial Base Function and Compare the Prediction Accuracy Using Naive Bayes Algorithm

Salim Lahmiri, K. Thinakaran, V. Pranitha, S V Rajabalaji
article en

Abstract

The proposed study aims to detect spam by utilizing the Radial Base Function and comparing the accuracy of predictions with Naive Bayes. Using machine learning techniques like Naive Bayes and Radial Base Function, spam can be detected. In this case, gpower 80% was used for the power analysis, and there are 20 participants in each of the two groups. Spam was detected with an accuracy of 0.93% and 0.96% using the Radial Base Function and Naive Bayes, respectively. To ascertain statistically significant differences, an independent sample t-test was employed, yielding a 2-tailed accuracy of 0.002 (<tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$p&lt;0.05$</tex>). Radial Base Function is outperformed by Naive Bayes.

Concordia University (US), Saveetha University (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 49%
Spam and Phishing Detection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Spam Detection Using Radial Base Function and Compare the Prediction Accuracy Using Naive Bayes Algorithm — Salim Lahmiri, K. Thinakaran, et al. · (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS