MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220686914 · doi:10.1007/s13278-022-00869-w

DeeProBot: a hybrid deep neural network model for social bot detection based on user profile data

2022· article· en· W4220686914 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

VenueSocial Network Analysis and Mining · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersZayed University
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceSocial network (sociolinguistics)Data miningMachine learningSocial mediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Use of online social networks (OSNs) undoubtedly brings the world closer. OSNs like Twitter provide a space for expressing one's opinions in a public platform. This great potential is misused by the creation of bot accounts, which spread fake news and manipulate opinions. Hence, distinguishing genuine human accounts from bot accounts has become a pressing issue for researchers. In this paper, we propose a framework based on deep learning to classify Twitter accounts as either 'human' or 'bot.' We use the information from user profile metadata of the Twitter account like description, follower count and tweet count. We name the framework 'DeeProBot,' which stands for Deep Profile-based Bot detection framework. The raw text from the description field of the Twitter account is also considered a feature for training the model by embedding the raw text using pre-trained Global Vectors (GLoVe) for word representation. Using only the user profile-based features considerably reduces the feature engineering overhead compared with that of user timeline-based features like user tweets and retweets. DeeProBot handles mixed types of features including numerical, binary, and text data, making the model hybrid. The network is designed with long short-term memory (LSTM) units and dense layers to accept and process the mixed input types. The proposed model is evaluated on a collection of publicly available labeled datasets. We have designed the model to make it generalizable across different datasets. The model is evaluated using two ways: testing on a hold-out set of the same dataset; and training with one dataset and testing with a different dataset. With these experiments, the proposed model achieved AUC as high as 0.97 with a selected set of features.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.230 · 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