Advertisement

Spammer Detection via Combined Neural Network

  • Weiping Pei
  • Youye Xie
  • Gongguo TangEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10934)

Abstract

Social networks, as an indispensable part of our daily lives, provide ideal platforms for entertainment and communication. However, the appearance of spammers who spread malicious information pollutes a network’s reliability. Unlike email spammers detection, a social network account has several types of attributes and complicated behavior patterns, which require a more sophisticated detection mechanism. To address the above challenges, we propose several efficient profiles and behavioral features to describe a social network account and a combined neural network to detect the spammers. The combined neural network can process the features separately based on their mutual correlation and handle data with missing features. In experiments, the combined neural network outperforms several classical machine learning approaches and achieves \(97.5\%\) accuracy on real data. The proposed features and the combined neural network have already been applied commercially.

Keywords

Spammer detection Social network Deep learning Data mining 

References

  1. 1.
    Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I.: Latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3(Jan), 993–1022 (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chakraborty, A., Sundi, J., Satapathy, S., et al.: SPAM: a framework for social profile abuse monitoring. CSE508 report, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, C., Wu, K., Srinivasan, V., Zhang, X.: Battling the internet water army: detection of hidden paid posters. In: 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), pp. 116–120. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cheng, H.T., Koc, L., Harmsen, J., Shaked, T., Chandra, T., Aradhye, H., Anderson, G., Corrado, G., Chai, W., Ispir, M., et al.: Wide & deep learning for recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Deep Learning for Recommender Systems, pp. 7–10. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheng, Z., Kai, N., Zhiqiang, H.: Dynamic detection of spammers in Weibo. In: 2014 4th IEEE International Conference on Network Infrastructure and Digital Content (IC-NIDC), pp. 112–116. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khan, A., Baharudin, B., Lee, L.H., Khan, K.: A review of machine learning algorithms for text-documents classification. J. Adv. Inf. Technol. 1(1), 4–20 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kingma, D., Ba, J.: Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014)
  8. 8.
    Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., Hinton, G.E.: ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 1097–1105 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu, Y., Wu, B., Wang, B., Li, G.: SDHM: a hybrid model for spammer detection in Weibo. In: 2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), pp. 942–947. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ming, L., Yunchun, L., Wei, L.: Spam filtering by stages. In: International Conference on Convergence Information Technology, pp. 2209–2213. IEEE (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    O’Donovan, J., Kang, B., Meyer, G., Hollerer, T., Adalii, S.: Credibility in context: an analysis of feature distributions in Twitter. In: 2012 International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust (PASSAT) and 2012 International Conference on Social Computing (SocialCom), pp. 293–301. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ruan, G., Tan, Y.: A three-layer back-propagation neural network for spam detection using artificial immune concentration. Soft. Comput. 14(2), 139–150 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C.J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., Van Den Driessche, G., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Panneershelvam, V., Lanctot, M., et al.: Mastering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529(7587), 484–489 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Srivastava, N., Hinton, G.E., Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., Salakhutdinov, R.: Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15(1), 1929–1958 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang, A.H.: Detecting spam bots in online social networking sites: a machine learning approach. In: Foresti, S., Jajodia, S. (eds.) DBSec 2010. LNCS, vol. 6166, pp. 335–342. Springer, Heidelberg (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13739-6_25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Xie, Y., Tang, G., Hoff, W.: Chess piece recognition using oriented chamfer matching with a comparison to CNN. In: IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) (2018)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yeh, C.Y., Wu, C.H., Doong, S.H.: Effective spam classification based on meta-heuristics. In: 2005 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 4, pp. 3872–3877. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zheng, X., Wang, J., Jie, F., Li, L.: Two phase based spammer detection in Weibo. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshop (ICDMW), pp. 932–939. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biliang, Ltd.ZhuhaiChina
  2. 2.Colorado School of MinesGoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations