MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380537293 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.6.003

EFN-SMOTE: An effective oversampling technique for credit card fraud detection by utilizing noise filtering and fuzzy c-means clustering

2023· article· en· W4380537293 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hadeel Ahmad, Bassam Kasasbeh, Balqees Aldabaybah, Enas Rawashdeh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImbalanced Data Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredit card fraudOversamplingCredit cardComputer scienceNoise (video)Artificial intelligenceFuzzy logicCluster analysisData miningMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)PaymentTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Credit card fraud poses a significant challenge for both consumers and organizations worldwide, particularly with the increasing reliance on credit cards for financial transactions. Therefore, it is crucial to establish effective mechanisms to detect credit card fraud. However, the uneven distribution of instances between the two classes in the credit card dataset hinders traditional machine learning techniques, as they tend to prioritize the majority class, leading to inaccurate fraud pre- dictions. To address this issue, this paper focuses on the use of the Elbow Fuzzy Noise Filtering SMOTE (EFN-SMOTE) technique, an oversampling approach, to handle unbalanced data. EFN-SMOTE partitions the dataset into multiple clusters using the Elbow method, applies noise filtering to each cluster, and then employs SMOTE to synthesize new minority instances based on the nearest majority instance to each minority instance, thereby improving the model’s ability to perceive the decision boundary. EFN-SMOTE’s performance was evaluated using an Artificial Neural Network model with four hidden layers, resulting in significant improvements in classification performance, achieving an accuracy of 0.999, precision of 0.998, sensitivity of 0.999, specificity of 0.998, F-measure of 0.999, and G-Mean of 0.999.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicImbalanced Data Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207