Mining Mobile Network Fraudsters with Augmented Graph Neural Networks
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
With the rapid evolution of mobile communication networks, the number of subscribers and their communication practices is increasing dramatically worldwide. However, fraudsters are also sniffing out the benefits. Detecting fraudsters from the massive volume of call detail records (CDR) in mobile communication networks has become an important yet challenging topic. Fortunately, Graph neural network (GNN) brings new possibilities for telecom fraud detection. However, the presence of the graph imbalance and GNN oversmoothing problems makes fraudster detection unsatisfactory. To address these problems, we propose a new fraud detector. First, we transform the user features with the help of a multilayer perceptron. Then, a reinforcement learning-based neighbor sampling strategy is designed to balance the number of neighbors of different classes of users. Next, we perform user feature aggregation using GNN. Finally, we innovatively treat the above augmented GNN as weak classifier and integrate multiple weak classifiers using the AdaBoost algorithm. A balanced focal loss function is also used to monitor the model training error. Extensive experiments are conducted on two open real-world telecom fraud datasets, and the results show that the proposed method is significantly effective for the graph imbalance problem and the oversmoothing problem in telecom fraud detection.
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 | 0.000 | 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