What about my second question
>> And do you mean there are the same >> thing, we should always use naivebayes.*, provided we can prepair the >> input data as required? > > Here's a link to the paper: > http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.13.8572&rank=1 > > --sebastian > >> >> Regards, >> >> Xiaobo Gu >> >> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Sebastian Schelter<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Xiaobo, >>> >>> as far as I recall the paper on which Mahout's NB implementation is based >>> on >>> consists of two parts, the first parts describes techniques to generally >>> improve NB's predicition quality on skewed input data and the likes while >>> the second part shows how to handle textual data. >>> >>> I think that bayes.* is an older implementation that includes the first >>> and >>> the second part of the paper, while naivebayes.* is a newer one that only >>> contains the general algorithm described in the first part of the paper. >>> >>> --sebastian >>> >>> On 14.08.2011 06:32, Xiaobo Gu wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> 1. What's difference between them from the algorithm point of view, do >>>> they only support category predictors only? >>>> 2. What are the input file format requirement of them, for >>>> org.apache.mahout.naivbayes.*, it requires >>>> SequenceFile<Text,VectorWritable>, and for org.apache.mahout.bayes.*, >>>> it requires a tab seperated text file without header, why not use the >>>> same input format? >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Xiaobo Gu >>> >>> > >
