4.7 Article

Detection of opinion spam based on anomalous rating deviation

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 42, 期 22, 页码 8650-8657

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2015.07.019

关键词

Anomaly detection; Binomial regression; Classification; Online product reviews; Opinion spam; Review spam

资金

  1. Australian Research Council Linkage Project [LP120200128]
  2. Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre
  3. Australian Research Council [LP120200128] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The publication of fake reviews by parties with vested interests has become a severe problem for consumers who use online product reviews in their decision making. To counter this problem a number of methods for detecting these fake reviews, termed opinion spam, have been proposed. However, to date, many of these methods focus on analysis of review text, making them unsuitable for many review systems where accompanying text is optional, or not possible. Moreover, these approaches are often computationally expensive, requiring extensive resources to handle text analysis over the scale of data typically involved. In this paper, we consider opinion spammers manipulation of average ratings for products, focusing on differences between spammer ratings and the majority opinion of honest reviewers. We propose a lightweight, effective method for detecting opinion spammers based on these differences. This method uses binomial regression to identify reviewers having an anomalous proportion of ratings that deviate from the majority opinion. Experiments on real-world and synthetic data show that our approach is able to successfully identify opinion spammers. Comparison with the current state-of-the-art approach, also based only on ratings, shows that our method is able to achieve similar detection accuracy while removing the need for assumptions regarding probabilities of spam and non-spam reviews and reducing the heavy computation required for learning. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据