A Perceptron Based Neural Network Data Analytics Architecture for the Detection of Fraud in Credit Card Transactions in Financial Legacy Systems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Credit card fraud, a significant and growing problem in commerce that costs the global economy billions of dollars each year, has kept up with technological advancements as criminals devise new and innovative methods to defraud account holders, merchants, and financial institutions. While traditional fraudulent methods involved card cloning, skimming, and counterfeiting during transactional processes, the rapid adoption and evolution of Internet technologies aimed at facilitating trade has given rise to new digitally initiated illegitimate transactions, with online credit card fraud beginning to outpace physical world transactions. According to the literature, the financial industry has used statistical methods and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to keep up with fraudulent card patterns, but there appears to be little effort to provide neural network architectures with proven results that can be adapted to financial legacy systems. The paper examines the feasibility and practicality of implementing a proof-of-concept Perceptron-based Artificial Neural Network (ANN) architecture that can be directly plugged into a legacy paradigm financial system platform that has been trained on specific fraudulent patterns. When using a credit checking subscription service, such a system could act as a backup.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it