A Graph Neural Network based approach for detecting Suspicious Users on Online Social Media.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Online Social Media platforms (such as Twitter and Facebook) are extensively used for spreading the news to a wider public effortlessly at a rapid pace. However, now a days these platforms are also used with an aim of spreading rumors and fake news to a large audience in a short time span that can cause panic, fear, and financial loss to society. Thus, it is important to detect and control these rumors before it spreads to the masses. One way to control the spread of these rumors is by identifying possible suspicious users who are often involved in spreading the rumors. Our basic assumption is that the users who are often involved in spreading rumors are more likely to be suspicious in contrast to the users whose involvement in spreading rumors are less. This is due to the fact that sometimes, users may posts the rumor tweets by accident. In this paper, we use PHEME rumor tweet dataset which contains rumor and non-rumor tweets information on five incidents, that is, i) Charlie hebdo, ii)German wings crash, iii)Ottawa shooting, iv)Sydney siege, and v)Ferguson. We transform this rumor tweets dataset into suspicious users dataset before leveraging Graph Neural Network (GNN) based approach for identifying suspicious users. Specifically, we explore Graph Convolutional Network (GCN),which is a type of GNN, for identifying suspicious users and then we compare GCN results with the other three approaches which act as baseline approaches: SVM, RF and LSTM based deep learning architecture. Extensive experiments performed on real-world dataset, where we achieve up to 0.864 value for F1-Score and 0.720 value for AUC ROC, shows the effectiveness of GNN based approach for identifying suspicious users.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".