MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333568743 · doi:10.1016/j.jfds.2016.03.001

Auto insurance fraud detection using unsupervised spectral ranking for anomaly

2016· article· en· W2333568743 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Finance and Data Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)Pattern recognition (psychology)Anomaly detectionComputer scienceSpectral clusteringData miningOutlierLaplacian matrixRank (graph theory)Artificial intelligenceCategorical variableSimilarity (geometry)Ranking SVMMathematicsMachine learningCluster analysisGraphTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For many data mining problems, obtaining labels is costly and time consuming, if not practically infeasible. In addition, unlabeled data often includes categorical or ordinal features which, compared with numerical features, can present additional challenges. We propose a new unsupervised spectral ranking method for anomaly (SRA). We illustrate that the spectral optimization in SRA can be viewed as a relaxation of an unsupervised SVM problem. We demonstrate that the first non-principal eigenvector of a Laplacian matrix is linked to a bi-class classification strength measure which can be used to rank anomalies. Using the first non-principal eigenvector of the Laplacian matrix directly, the proposed SRA generates an anomaly ranking either with respect to the majority class or with respect to two main patterns. The choice of the ranking reference can be made based on whether the cardinality of the smaller class (positive or negative) is sufficiently large. Using an auto insurance claim data set but ignoring labels when generating ranking, we show that our proposed SRA significantly surpasses existing outlier-based fraud detection methods. Finally we demonstrate that, while proposed SRA yields good performance for a few similarity measures for the auto insurance claim data, notably ones based on the Hamming distance, choosing appropriate similarity measures for a fraud detection problem remains crucial.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it