MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163881436 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3081479

A Spam Transformer Model for SMS Spam Detection

2021· article· en· W3163881436 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

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTransformerSpammingShort Message ServiceSpambotMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningComputer networkWorld Wide WebThe InternetEngineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we aim to explore the possibility of the Transformer model in detecting the spam Short Message Service (SMS) messages by proposing a modified Transformer model that is designed for detecting SMS spam messages. The evaluation of our proposed spam Transformer is performed on SMS Spam Collection v.1 dataset and UtkMl's Twitter Spam Detection Competition dataset, with the benchmark of multiple established machine learning classifiers and state-of-the-art SMS spam detection approaches. In comparison to all other candidates, our experiments on SMS spam detection show that the proposed modified spam Transformer has the optimal results on the accuracy, recall, and F1-Score with the values of 98.92%, 0.9451, and 0.9613, respectively. Besides, the proposed model also achieves good performance on the UtkMl's Twitter dataset, which indicates a promising possibility of adapting the model to other similar problems.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.252 · 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