Paper detail

Fake Review Detection Using Behavioral and Contextual Features

User reviews reflect significant value of product in the world of e-market. Many firms or product providers hire spammers for misleading new customers by posting spam reviews. There are three types of fake reviews, untruthful reviews, brand reviews and non-reviews. All three types mislead the new customers. A multinomial organization "Yelp" is separating fake reviews from non-fake reviews since last decade. However, there are many e-commerce sites which do not filter fake and non-fake reviews separately. Automatic fake review detection is focused by researcher for last ten years. Many approaches and feature set are proposed for improving classification model of fake review detection. There are two types of dataset commonly used in this research area: psuedo fake and real life reviews. Literature reports low performance of classification model real life dataset if compared with pseudo fake reviews. After investigation behavioral and contextual features are proved important for fake review detection Our research has exploited important behavioral feature of reviewer named as "reviewer deviation". Our study comprises of investigating reviewer deviation with other contextual and behavioral features. We empirically proved importance of selected feature set for classification model to identify fake reviews. We ranked features in selected feature set where reviewer deviation achieved ninth rank. To assess the viability of selected feature set we scaled dataset and concluded that scaling dataset can improve recall as well as accuracy. Our selected feature set contains a contextual feature which capture text similarity between reviews of a reviewer. We experimented on NNC, LTC and BM25 term weighting schemes for calculating text similarity of reviews. We report that BM25 outperformed other term weighting scheme.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Authors

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.