Leveraging feature selection to detect potential tax fraudsters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tax evasion is any act that knowingly or unknowingly, legally or unlawfully, leads to non-payment or underpayment of tax due. Enforcing the correct payment of taxes by taxpayers is fundamental in maintaining investments that are necessary and benefits a society as a whole. Indeed, without taxes it is not possible to guarantee basic services such as health-care, education, sanitation, transportation, infrastructure, among other services essential to the population. This issue is especially relevant in developing countries such as Brazil. In this work we consider a real-world case study involving the Treasury Office of the State of Ceará (SEFAZ-CE, Brazil), the agency in charge of supervising more than 300,000 active taxpayers companies. SEFAZ-CE maintains a very large database containing vast amounts of information concerning such companies. Its enforcement team struggles to perform thorough inspections on taxpayers accounts as the underlying traditional human-based inspection processes involve the evaluation of countless fraud indicators (i.e., binary features), thus requiring burdensome amounts of time and being potentially prone to human errors. On the other hand, the vast amount of taxpayer information collected by fiscal agencies opens up the possibility of devising novel techniques able to tackle fiscal evasion much more effectively than traditional approaches. In this work we address the problem of using feature selection to select the most relevant binary features to improve the classification of potential tax fraudsters. Finding out possible fraudsters from taxpayer data with binary features presents several challenges. First, taxpayer data typically have features with low linear correlation between themselves. Also, tax frauds may originate from intricate illicit tactics, which in turn requires to uncover non-linear relationships between multiple features. Finally, few features may be correlated with the targeted class. In this work we propose Alicia, a new feature selection method based on association rules and propositional logic with a carefully crafted graph centrality measure that attempts to tackle the above challenges while, at the same time, being agnostic to specific classification techniques. Alicia is structured in three phases: first, it generates a set of relevant association rules from a set of fraud indicators (features). Subsequently, from such association rules Alicia builds a graph, which structure is then used to determine the most relevant features. To achieve this Alicia applies a novel centrality measure we call the Feature Topological Importance. We perform an extensive experimental evaluation to assess the validity of our proposal on four different real-world datasets, where we compare our solution with eight other feature selection methods. The results show that Alicia achieves F-measure scores up to 76.88%, and consistently outperforms its competitors.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".