Abstract: e-mail has become an important means of electronic
communication but the viability of its usage is marred by Unsolicited
Bulk e-mail (UBE) messages. UBE consists of many types
like pornographic, virus infected and 'cry-for-help' messages as well
as fake and fraudulent offers for jobs, winnings and medicines. UBE
poses technical and socio-economic challenges to usage of e-mails.
To meet this challenge and combat this menace, we need to
understand UBE. Towards this end, the current paper presents a
content-based textual analysis of nearly 3000 winnings-announcing
UBE. Technically, this is an application of Text Parsing and
Tokenization for an un-structured textual document and we approach
it using Bag Of Words (BOW) and Vector Space Document Model
techniques. We have attempted to identify the most frequently
occurring lexis in the winnings-announcing UBE documents. The
analysis of such top 100 lexis is also presented. We exhibit the
relationship between occurrence of a word from the identified lexisset
in the given UBE and the probability that the given UBE will be
the one announcing fake winnings. To the best of our knowledge and
survey of related literature, this is the first formal attempt for
identification of most frequently occurring lexis in winningsannouncing
UBE by its textual analysis. Finally, this is a sincere
attempt to bring about alertness against and mitigate the threat of
such luring but fake UBE.
Abstract: The paper considered the construction of BIBDs using potential Lotto Designs (LDs) earlier derived from qualifying parent BIBDs. The study utilized Li’s condition pr t−1 ( t−1 2 ) + pr− pr t−1 (t−1) 2 < ( p 2 ) λ, to determine the qualification of a parent BIBD (v, b, r, k, λ) as LD (n, k, p, t) constrained on v ≥ k, v ≥ p, t ≤ min{k, p} and then considered the case k = t since t is the smallest number of tickets that can guarantee a win in a lottery. The (15, 140, 28, 3, 4) and (7, 7, 3, 3, 1) BIBDs were selected as parent BIBDs to illustrate the procedure. These BIBDs yielded three potential LDs each. Each of the LDs was completely generated and their properties studied. The three LDs from the (15, 140, 28, 3, 4) produced (9, 84, 28, 3, 7), (10, 120, 36, 3, 8) and (11, 165, 45, 3, 9) BIBDs while those from the (7, 7, 3, 3, 1) produced the (5, 10, 6, 3, 3), (6, 20, 10, 3, 4) and (7, 35, 15, 3, 5) BIBDs. The produced BIBDs follow the generalization (v + 1, b + r + λ + 1, r +λ+1, k, λ+1) where (v, b, r, k, λ) are the parameters of the (9, 84, 28, 3, 7) and (5, 10, 6, 3, 3) BIBDs. All the BIBDs produced are unreduced designs.