MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392034177 · doi:10.32920/25266652

Efficient Detection of Shillings Attacks in Collaborative Filtering Recommendation Systems using Hybrid Deep Learning: A CNN-based Model and Architecture

2024· preprint· en· W4392034177 on OpenAlexaff
Mahsa Ebrahimian

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRecommender systemCollaborative filteringArtificial intelligenceMachine learningBenchmark (surveying)Classifier (UML)ArchitectureDeep learningHybrid learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recommendation systems are widely used in various areas to personalize recommendations to users. However, they are vulnerable to shilling attacks in which malicious users try to promote their products or diminish their competitors. Therefore, detecting shilling attacks can significantly improve the quality of recommender systems. With the increasing complexity of attacks and changes in attackers' behaviour, more advanced approaches are required to find the hidden patterns in data. This thesis proposes a CNN-based hybrid model and architecture that integrates self-learning and flexible aspects of CNN with other supervised learning methods to enhance shillings attacks detection on collaborative filtering recommendation systems. We also introduce a new metric, the F-compatible score, to measure the compatibility ratio of merging the CNN with any other classifier in a given aggregate. This measure helps in monitoring the enhancement level of the detection results of shilling attacks. Two different approaches are proposed in this thesis, user-based, and item-based. The experimental analysis used three benchmark datasets: the Movie-Lens 100K, Netflix, and Movie-Lens 1M. A comprehensive comparative analysis is also completed to assess the performance of both individual-based and hybrid-based detection models. Experimental results show that the proposed hybrid models performed well on most attack profiles and reached an F1-score of up to 99%. We concluded that the superiority of hybrid models over individual models depends on the sparsity level of data and the divergence of results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207