Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 348

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exploiting Burstiness in Reviews for Review Spammer Detection

Open access
Fei, Geli, Mukherjee, Arjun, Liu, Bing, Hsu, Meichun, Castellanos, Malu, Ghosh, Riddhiman·2021·Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media

Abstract

Online product reviews have become an important source of user opinions. Due to profit or fame, imposters have been writing deceptive or fake reviews to promote and/or to demote some target products or services. Such imposters are called review spammers. In the past few years, several approaches have been proposed to deal with the problem. In this work, we take a different approach, which exploits the burstiness nature of reviews to identify review spammers. Bursts of reviews can be either due to sudden popularity of products or spam attacks. Reviewers and reviews appearing in a burst are often related in the sense that spammers tend to work with other spammers and genuine reviewers tend to appear together with other genuine reviewers. This paves the way for us to build a network of reviewers appearing in different bursts. We then model reviewers and their co-occurrence in bursts as a Markov Random Field (MRF), and employ the Loopy Belief Propagation (LBP) method to infer whether a reviewer is a spammer or not in the graph. We also propose several features and employ feature induced message passing in the LBP framework for network inference. We further propose a novel evaluation method to evaluate the detected spammers automatically using supervised classification of their reviews. Additionally, we employ domain experts to perform a human evaluation of the identified spammers and non-spammers. Both the classification result and human evaluation result show that the proposed method outperforms strong baselines, which demonstrate the effectiveness of the method.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14400

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 348

Metadata

Authors
Fei, G., Mukherjee, A., Liu, B., Hsu, M., Castellanos, M., & Ghosh, R.
Venue
Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
Published
2021-08-03
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
175-184
ISSN
  • 2162-3449 (ISSN-L)
  • 2334-0770
OpenAlex
W2189187207
Cited by
348
References
4
FWCI
16.40
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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: Exploiting Burstiness in Reviews for Review Spammer Detection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14400
The paper
Fei, G., Mukherjee, A., Liu, B., Hsu, M., Castellanos, M., & Ghosh, R. (2021). Exploiting Burstiness in Reviews for Review Spammer Detection. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14400

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.