MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-Class Mobile Money Service Financial Fraud Detection by Integrating Supervised Learning with Adversarial Autoencoders

2021· article· en· W3199888448 on OpenAlexaff
Julio Cezar Soares Silva, David Macêdo, Cleber Zanchettin, Adriano L. I. Oliveira, Adiel Teixeira de Almeida Filho

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalConcordia University
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsComputer scienceAutoencoderArtificial intelligenceMachine learningDatabase transactionAnomaly detectionCredit card fraudFinancial servicesAuditDeep learningPaymentCredit cardFinanceAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the actual volume and speed of financial transactions, financial fraud detection systems are constantly evolving based on new computational intelligence algorithms. Therefore, transaction monitoring and analysis prevent monetary losses caused by fraudsters. Since the fraud detection process is a labor-intensive task for human auditors given the huge amount of daily transactions processed by financial services information systems. Credit card is the financial product most explored in the financial fraud detection literature, while mobile money service is becoming a popular option for payments, fraud detection for such financial product has not yet been deeply explored. Therefore, it is interesting to optimize the auditing process and test new quantitative techniques, such as deep learning, to support human auditors before double-checking a suspicious transaction. Thus, we propose an integration of adversarial autoencoders and machine learning methods to perform an objective classification among three transaction types: regular, local, and global anomaly. The integration consists of using the autoencoder's generated latent vectors as features for the supervised learning algorithms. The experiments considered different latent vector space forms concerning their dimensionality and the clusters generated by a prior Gaussian mixture. The results show that some classifiers may accept latent characteristics well, getting better or similar performance when using all the original characteristics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImbalanced Data Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207