With remiss, I haven't tried these R tools.
However, I tried a dozen Naive Bayes-like programs, often used to filter
email, where the serious problem with spam has resulted in many
innovations.
The most touted of the worldwide Naive Bayes programs seems to be
CRM114 (not in R, I expect, since its
Hi
This is a question regarding classification performance using different methods.
So far I've tried NaiveBayes (klaR package), svm (e1071) package and
randomForest (randomForest). What has puzzled me is that randomForest seems to
perform far better (32% classification error) than svm and
I can't add much to your question, being a complete novice at
classification, but I have tried both randomForest and SVM and I get better
results from randomForest than SVM (even after tuning). randomForest is
also much, much faster. I just thought randomForest was a much better
algorithm,
