Cited by 32Spam and Phishing DetectionMisinformation and Its ImpactsHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection

Fake Profile Detection Using Machine Learning Techniques

Open access
Chakraborty, Partha, Shazan, Mahim Musharof, Nahid, Mahamudul, Ahmed, Md. Kaysar, Talukder, Prince Chandra·2022·Journal of Computer and Communications

Abstract

Our lives are significantly impacted by social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, and others. People are actively participating in it the world over. However, it also has to deal with the issue of bogus profiles. False accounts are frequently created by humans, bots, or computers. They are used to disseminate rumors and engage in illicit activities like identity theft and phishing. So, in this project, the author’ll talk about a detection model that uses a variety of machine learning techniques to distinguish between fake and real Twitter profiles based on attributes like follower and friend counts, status updates, and more. The author used the dataset of Twitter profiles, separating real accounts into TFP and E13 and false accounts into INT, TWT, and FSF. Here, the author discusses LSTM, XG Boost, Random Forest, and Neural Networks. The key characteristics are chosen to assess a social media profile’s authenticity. Hyperparameters and the architecture are also covered. Finally, results are produced after training the models. The output is therefore 0 for genuine profiles and 1 for false profiles. When a phony profile is discovered, it can be disabled or destroyed so that cyber security problems can be prevented. Python and the necessary libraries, such as Sklearn, Numpy, and Pandas, are used for implementation. At the end of this study, the author will come to the conclusion that XG Boost is the best machine learning technique for finding fake profiles.

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 · 10.4236/jcc.2022.1010006

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Fake accounts contribute to spreading false information, illegal activities such as identity theft and phishing, and rumours, which may create social rigidities and divergences.

    “There are several concerns such as spreading false information, engaging in illegal activities such as character burglary and phishing, and rumours, which may create rigidities and divergences in society7.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ahammad, K., Shawon, J.A.B., Chakraborty, P., Islam, M.J. and Islam, S. (2021) Recognizing Bengali Sign Language Gestures for Digits in Real Time using Convo- lutional Neural Network. International Journal of Computer Science and Informa- tion Security (IJCSIS), 19, 11-19.
  2. Reddy, S.D.P. (2019) Fake Profile Identification Using Machine Learning. Interna- tional Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), 6, 1145-1150.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chakraborty, P., Shazan, M. M., Nahid, M., Ahmed, M. K., & Talukder, P. C.
Affiliations
Comilla University (BD)
Corresponding author
Chakraborty, Partha
Venue
Journal of Computer and Communications
Published
2022
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
74-87
ISSN
  • 2327-5219 (ISSN-L)
  • 2327-5227
OpenAlex
W4312750304
Cited by
32
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Computer and Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Keywords
fake profile detection, social bots, Twitter accounts, bot detection, XGBoost, LSTM, random forest, artificial neural networks, status updates, cybersecurity

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