International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business(IJIEEB)

ISSN: 2074-9023 (Print), ISSN: 2074-9031 (Online)

Published By: MECS Press

IJIEEB Vol.7, No.2, Mar. 2015

Feature Extraction or Feature Selection for Text Classification: A Case Study on Phishing Email Detection

Full Text (PDF, 380KB), PP.60-65

Views:109   Downloads:10


Masoumeh Zareapoor, Seeja K. R

Index Terms

Feature Selection;Feature Extraction;Dimensionality Reduction;Text mining; Phishing;Classification


Dimensionality reduction is generally performed when high dimensional data like text are classified. This can be done either by using feature extraction techniques or by using feature selection techniques. This paper analyses which dimension reduction technique is better for classifying text data like emails. Email classification is difficult due to its high dimensional sparse features that affect the generalization performance of classifiers. In phishing email detection, dimensionality reduction techniques are used to keep the most instructive and discriminative features from a collection of emails, consists of both phishing and legitimate, for better detection. Two feature selection techniques - Chi-Square and Information Gain Ratio and two feature extraction techniques – Principal Component Analysis and Latent Semantic Analysis are used for the analysis. It is found that feature extraction techniques offer better performance for the classification, give stable classification results with the different number of features chosen, and robustly keep the performance over time.

Cite This Paper

Masoumeh Zareapoor, Seeja K. R,"Feature Extraction or Feature Selection for Text Classification: A Case Study on Phishing Email Detection", IJIEEB, vol.7, no.2, pp.60-65, 2015. DOI: 10.5815/ijieeb.2015.02.08


[1]APWG. Anti phishing working:

[2]Phishing Activity Trends Report 2014:

[3]I.R.A.Hamid, J.Abawajy. Hybrid feature selection for phishing email detection. International Conference of Algorithms and Architectures for Parallel Processing, (2011), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin, Germany; 266-275.

[4]G. L. Huillier, R. Weber, N. Figueroa. Online Phishing Classification Using Adversarial Data Mining and Signaling Games. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, (2009), 11(2); 92-99.

[5]J.J. Verbeek. Supervised Feature Extraction for Text Categorization. Tenth Belgian-Dutch Conference on Machine Learning, (2000).

[6]G. Biricik, B. Diri, A.C. Sonmez. Abstract feature extraction for text classification. Turk J Elec Eng & Comp Sci, (2012), 20(1); 1102-1015. 

[7]J.C. Gomez, M.F. Moens. PCA document reconstruction for email classification. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, (2012), 56(3); 741–751.

[8]J.C.Gomez, E. Boiy, M.F.Moens. Highly discriminative statistical features for email classification. Knowledge and Information System, (2012), 31(1); 23-53.

[9]A. Tsymbal, S. Puuronen, M. Pechenizkiy, M. Baumgarten, D.W.Patterson. Eigenvector-based feature extraction for classification. AAAI Press, (2002); 354–358.

[10]J.D.Brutlag, C.Meek. Challenges of the email domain for text classification. In Proceedings of the seventeenth international conference on machine learning, (2000); 103–110.

[11]Y. Xia, K.F. Wong. Binarization approaches to email categorization. In: ICCPOL; 474–481. 

[12]G.L.Huillier, A.Hevia, R.Weber, S.Rios. Latent Semantic Analysis and Keyword Extraction for Phishing Classification. IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics, (2010); 129 – 131. 

[13]M. Hall, L. Smith. Practical feature subset selection for machine learning. Proceedings of the 21st Australasian Conference on Computer Science. (1998); 181-191.

[14]T. Mori. Information gain ratio as term weight: The case of summarization of IR results. In Proceeding of the 19th international conference on computational linguistics, Taiwan (2002); 688-694.

[15]Phishing Corpus:; 

[16]SpamAssassin PublicCorpus: http://spamassassin.apache. org/publiccorpus

[17]A. Almomani, T.C.Wan, A.Manasrah, A.Altaher, M.Baklizi, S.Ramadass. An enhanced online phishing e-mail detection framework based on evolving connectionist system. International journal of innovative computing, information and control (2012); 9(2); 1065-1086.

[18]D. Opitz, R. Maclin. Popular ensemble methods: An empirical study. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, (1999), Vol(11); 169-198

[19]F Toolan, J. Carthy. Phishing Detection using Classifier Ensembles. IEEE conference on eCrime Researchers Summit, Tacoma, WA, USA, (2009); 1 – 9.

[20]S.A. Nimeh, D. Nappa, X. Wang, S. Nair. A comparison of machine learning techniques for phishing detection. In Proceedings of the eCrime Researchers Summit, 2007; vol. 1. (Pittsburgh, PA, USA); 60–69.

[21]V. Ramanathan, H. Wechsler. Phishing detection and impersonated entity discovery using Conditional Random Field and Latent Dirichlet Allocation. Journal of Computers & Security, (2013), 34; 123-139.

[22]V.Ramanathan, H.Wechsler. PhishGILLNET-phishing detection methodology using probabilistic latent semantic analysis, AdaBoost and co-training. Journal on information security, 2012.