Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mona Mojdeh
dblp:07/5952
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 2 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers |
Data mining · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Data mining › anomaly detection
spam detection |
0.2 | 2 | 2010 | Semi-supervised spam filtering using aggressive consistency learning · SIGIR 2010 Semi-supervised spam filtering: does it work? · SIGIR 2008 |
Data mining › text mining › text classification
email classification |
0.1 | 2 | 2010 | Semi-supervised spam filtering using aggressive consistency learning · SIGIR 2010 Semi-supervised spam filtering: does it work? · SIGIR 2008 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
local and global consistency · 0.1graph-based semi-supervised learning · 0.1transductive support vector machines · 0.1self-training · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | Semi-supervised spam filtering using aggressive consistency learningabstractA graph based semi-supervised method for email spam filtering, based on the local and global consistency method, yields low error rates with very few labeled examples. The motivating application of this method is spam filters with access to very few labeled message. For example, during the initial deployment of a spam filter, only a handful of labeled examples are available but unlabeled examples are plentiful. We demonstrate the performance of our approach on TREC 2007 and CEAS 2008 email corpora. Our results compare favorably with the best-known methods, using as few as just two labeled examples: one spam and one non-spam. Mona Mojdeh, Gordon V. Cormack |
SIGIR | 1 |
| 2008 | Semi-supervised spam filtering: does it work?abstractThe results of the 2006 ECML/PKDD Discovery Challenge suggest that semi-supervised learning methods work well for spam filtering when the source of available labeled examples differs from those to be classified. We have attempted to reproduce these results using data from the 2005 and 2007 TREC Spam Track, and have found the opposite effect: methods like self-training and transductive support vector machines yield inferior classifiers to those constructed using supervised learning on the labeled data alone. We investigate differences between the ECML/PKDD and TREC data sets and methodologies that may account for the opposite results. Mona Mojdeh, Gordon V. Cormack |
SIGIR | 1 |