Online Transaction Fraud Detection Using Efficient Dimensionality Reduction and Machine Learning Techniques
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
In recent years, there has been a rapid increase in the number of online transactions. Substantial growth has been reported in e-commerce and e-governance in the past few years. Due to this the number of people using online payment methods has also increased. This has led to an exponential rise in the number of transactions that happen every day. This increase in online transactions has further led to an increase in the number of frauds in the transactions. There is an ever-growing need to detect these fraudulent transactions as early as possible so that appropriate actions could be taken and losses due to these frauds could be minimized. This work proposes machine learning models which could use the previously known data and try to predict frauds based on information learned through the old data. We propose a statistical based dimensionality reduction technique and various machine learning models were tried for classification purpose. We experimented our proposed method on IEEE-CIS Fraud Detection dataset and the best results were obtained on the XGBoost model which is demonstrated in this paper.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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