The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Improve Fidelity and Utility of Synthetic Credit Card Transaction Time Series from Data-centric Perspective
Abstract
Exploring generative model training for synthetic tabular data, specifically in sequential contexts such as credit card transaction data, presents significant challenges. This paper addresses these challenges, focusing on attaining both high fidelity to actual data and optimal utility for machine learning tasks. We introduce five pre-processing schemas to enhance the training of the Conditional Probabilistic Auto-Regressive Model (CPAR), demonstrating incremental improvements in the synthetic data's fidelity and utility. Upon achieving satisfactory fidelity levels, our attention shifts to training fraud detection models tailored for time-series data, evaluating the utility of the synthetic data. Our findings offer valuable insights and practical guidelines for synthetic data practitioners in the finance sector, transitioning from real to synthetic datasets for training purposes, and illuminating broader methodologies for synthesizing credit card transaction time series.
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.
Metadata
- Authors
- Hsieh, D.-Y., Wang, C.-H., & Cheng, G.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- arXiv
- 2401.00965
- Type
- Preprint
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: Improve Fidelity and Utility of Synthetic Credit Card Transaction Time Series from Data-centric Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2401.00965
- The paper
- Hsieh, D.-Y., Wang, C.-H., & Cheng, G. (2024). Improve Fidelity and Utility of Synthetic Credit Card Transaction Time Series from Data-centric Perspective. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2401.00965
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.
