Detecting Shilling Attacks Using Hybrid Deep Learning Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recommendation systems play a significant role in alleviating information overload in the digital world. They provide suggestions to users based on past symmetric activities or behaviors. Being heavily dependent on users’ behavior, they tend to be vulnerable to shilling attacks. Therefore, protecting them from attacks’ effects is highly important. As shilling attacks have features of a large number of ratings and increasing complexity in attack models, deep learning methods become proper alternatives for more accurate attack detections. This paper proposes a hybrid model of two different neural networks, convolutional and recurrent neural networks, to detect shilling attacks efficiently. The proposed deep learning model utilizes the transformed network architecture for undertaking the attributes derived from user-rated profiles. This architecture enables modeling of the temporal and spatial information in the recommendation system’s ratings. The hybrid model overcomes the limitations of the existing shilling attack deep-learning methods to enhance the recommendation systems’ efficiency and robustness. Experimental results show that the hybrid model results in better predictions on the Movie-Lens 100 K and Netflix datasets by accurately detecting most of the obfuscated attacks compared to the state-of-art deep learning algorithms used for investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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".