This analysis demonstrates high accuracy in SMS spam detection using TF-IDF and classifiers like Naive Bayes and SVMs, indicating better spam filtering.
This study evaluates feature extraction techniques and classifiers for detecting SMS spam. We compared six classifiers: Naive Bayes, K-Nearest Neighbors, Support Vector Machines, Linear Discriminant Analysis, Decision Trees, and Deep Neural Networks, using both bag-of-words and TF-IDF. Results show TF-IDF consistently outperforms bag-of-words, with Naive Bayes achieving the highest accuracy (96.2%) and strong precision for non-spam (0.976). Support Vector Machines (94.5% accuracy) and Deep Neural Networks (91.0% accuracy) also performed well. In contrast, K-Nearest Neighbours, Linear Discriminant Analysis, and Decision Trees were less effective. Findings highlight TF-IDF with Naive Bayes, SVMs, or DNNs as optimal for spam detection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahmadi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: