The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detecting Management Fraud in Public Companies
Abstract
This paper provides a methodology for detecting management fraud using basic financial data. The methodology is based on support vector machines. An important aspect therein is a kernel that increases the power of the learning machine by allowing an implicit and generally nonlinear mapping of points, usually into a higher dimensional feature space. A kernel specific to the domain of finance is developed. This financial kernel constructs features shown in prior research to be helpful in detecting management fraud. A large empirical data set was collected, which included quantitative financial attributes for fraudulent and nonfraudulent public companies. Support vector machines using the financial kernel correctly labeled 80% of the fraudulent cases and 90.6% of the nonfraudulent cases on a holdout set. Furthermore, we replicate other leading fraud research studies using our data and find that our method has the highest accuracy on fraudulent cases and competitive accuracy on nonfraudulent cases. The results validate the financial kernel together with support vector machines as a useful method for discriminating between fraudulent and nonfraudulent companies using only publicly available quantitative financial attributes. The results also show that the methodology has predictive value because, using only historical data, it was able to distinguish fraudulent from nonfraudulent companies in subsequent years.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory
Vapnik, V. N. (1995) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2440-0 · Cited by 39,138
Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation
Haykin, S. (1998) · Cited by 30,070
Wu, Y. (1999) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1999.10485951 · Cited by 27,221
An introduction to ROC analysis
Fawcett, T. (2006) · Pattern Recognition Letters · doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010 · Cited by 21,879
THE USE OF MULTIPLE MEASUREMENTS IN TAXONOMIC PROBLEMS
FISHER, R. A. (1936) · Annals of Eugenics · doi:10.1111/j.1469-1809.1936.tb02137.x · Cited by 15,227
FINANCIAL RATIOS, DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS AND THE PREDICTION OF CORPORATE BANKRUPTCY
Altman, E. I. (1968) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb00843.x · Cited by 14,888
An Introduction to Support Vector Machines and Other Kernel-based Learning Methods
Cristianini, N., & Shawe-Taylor, J. (2000) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511801389 · Cited by 13,855
Hapeman, D. E. (1991) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1991.10484817 · Cited by 9,373
Text categorization with Support Vector Machines: Learning with many relevant features
Joachims, T. (1998) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/bfb0026683 · Cited by 7,999
Kernel Methods for Pattern Analysis
Shawe-Taylor, J., & Cristianini, N. (2004) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809682 · Cited by 6,587
Cited by
MetaFraud: A Meta-Learning Framework for Detecting Financial Fraud1
Abbasi, A., Albrecht, C., Vance, A., & Hansen, J. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41703508 · Cited by 298
Metadata
- Authors
- Cecchini, M., Aytug, H., Koehler, G. J., & Pathak, P.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2010-07
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1146-1160
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2167332641
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 20.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Detecting Management Fraud in Public Companies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1174
- The paper
- Cecchini, M., Aytug, H., Koehler, G. J., & Pathak, P. (2010). Detecting Management Fraud in Public Companies. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1174
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.