Cited by 382Complex Network Analysis TechniquesSpam and Phishing DetectionAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications

Netprobe: a fast and scalable system for fraud detection in online auction networks

Pandit, Shashank, Chau, Duen Horng, Wang, Samuel, Faloutsos, Christos·2007·Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web

Abstract

Given a large online network of online auction users and their histories of transactions, how can we spot anomalies and auction fraud? This paper describes the design and implementation of NetProbe, a system that we propose for solving this problem. NetProbe models auction users and transactions as a Markov Random Field tuned to detect the suspicious patterns that fraudsters create, and employs a Belief Propagation mechanism to detect likely fraudsters. Our experiments show that NetProbe is both efficient and effective for fraud detection. We report experiments on synthetic graphs with as many as 7,000 nodes and 30,000 edges, where NetProbe was able to spot fraudulent nodes with over 90% precision and recall, within a matter of seconds. We also report experiments on a real dataset crawled from eBay, with nearly 700,000 transactions between more than 66,000users, where NetProbe was highly effective at unearthing hidden networks of fraudsters, within a realistic response time of about 6 minutes. For scenarios where the underlying data is dynamic in nature, we propose IncrementalNetProbe, which is an approximate, but fast, variant of NetProbe. Our experiments prove that Incremental NetProbe executes nearly doubly fast as compared to NetProbe, while retaining over 99% of its accuracy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1242572.1242600

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 19 · Cited by 382

Authors
Pandit, S., Chau, D. H., Wang, S., & Faloutsos, C.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web
Publisher
ACM
Published
2007-05-08
Pages
201-210
OpenAlex
W2148123869
Cited by
382
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 27
FWCI
14.25
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Keywords
Markov random fields, belief propagation, social network analysis, eBay, dynamic graphs

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