Retracted: Detecting Fake News using Machine Learning and Deep Learning Algorithms
Abstract
Social media interaction especially the news spreading around the network is a great source of information nowadays. From one's perspective, its negligible exertion, straightforward access, and quick dispersing of information that lead people to look out and eat up news from internet-based life. Twitter being a standout amongst the most well-known ongoing news sources additionally ends up a standout amongst the most dominant news radiating mediums. It is known to cause extensive harm by spreading bits of gossip previously. Online clients are normally vulnerable and will, in general, perceive all that they run over web-based networking media as reliable. Consequently, mechanizing counterfeit news recognition is elementary to keep up hearty online media and informal organization. This paper proposes a model for recognizing forged news messages from twitter posts, by figuring out how to anticipate precision appraisals, in view of computerizing forged news identification in Twitter datasets. Afterwards, we performed a comparison between five well-known Machine Learning algorithms, like Support Vector Machine, Naïve Bayes Method, Logistic Regression and Recurrent Neural Network models, separately to demonstrate the efficiency of the classification performance on the dataset. Our experimental result showed that SVM and Naïve Bayes classifier outperforms the other algorithms.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Online clients are normally vulnerable and generally perceive web-based social media as reliable.
“Online clients are normally vulnerable and will, in general, perceive web-based networking media as reliable, as reported by Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. (2019), who propose to mechanize fake news recognition.”
From Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2019
In addition to bots causing most misrepresentations, specific individuals also contribute a large share of the issue.
“It is worth noting that in addition to bots causing the outpouring of the majority of the misrepresentations, specific individuals are also contributing a large share of this issue (Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2019).”
From Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2019
Verified users and those with numerous followers were not necessarily responsible for spreading misinformation of corrupted posts.
“In this case, verified users and those with numerous followers were not necessarily responsible for spreading misinformation of the corrupted posts (Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2019).”
From Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2019
Cites
The spread of true and false news online
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap9559 · Cited by 8,847 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review
Aïmeur, E., Amri, S., & Brassard, G. (2023) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-023-01028-5 · Cited by 772 · see citing works
Carrasco-Farré, C. (2022) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-022-01174-9 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Exploring the Use of Personalized AI for Identifying Misinformation on Social Media
Jahanbakhsh, F., Katsis, Y., Wang, D., Popa, L., & Muller, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581219 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tanvir, A. A., Mahir, E. M., Akhter, S., & Huq, M. R.
- Affiliations
- East West University (BD)
- Venue
- 2019 7th International Conference on Smart Computing & Communications (ICSCC)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2019-06
- Pages
- 1-5
- OpenAlex
- W2973869284
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 7
- FWCI
- 52.79
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Status
- Retracted
- Update notices
- retraction (2026-07-14)
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on Smart Computing and Communications (ICSCC) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
- Keywords
- fake news detection, misinformation, Twitter, social media, text classification, support vector machine, naive Bayes, logistic regression, recurrent neural networks, retraction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review