Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Graph-based review spammer group detection

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Online product reviews nowadays are increasingly prevalent in E-commerce websites. People often refer to product reviews to evaluate the quality of a product before purchasing. However, there have been a large number of review spammers who often work collaboratively to promote or demote target products, which severely harm the review system. Much previous work exploits machine learning approaches to detect suspicious reviews/reviewers. In this paper, we introduce a top-down computing framework, namely GGSpam, to detect review spammer groups by exploiting the topological structure of the underlying reviewer graph which reveals the co-review collusiveness. A novel instantiation of GGSpam, namely GSBC, is designed by modeling spammer groups as bi-connected graphs. Given a reviewer graph, GSBC identifies all the bi-connected components whose spamicity scores exceed the given spam threshold. For large unsuspicious bi-connected graphs, the minimum cut algorithm is used to split the graph, and the smaller graphs are further processed recursively. A variety of group spam indicators are designed to measure the spamicity of a spammer group. Experimental study shows that the proposed approach is both effective and efficient and outperforms several state-of-the-art baselines, including graph based and non-graph based, by a large margin.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/AL3IL4XVAJVVR, A2K2Z8HF242WQR, A2R7ZHGHQPHLL7, ABWMFZUSJGTG7, A1XI5QKMR9NCAL, A2AOMOVZXSIQYX, A35KS5LSEVAVUD

  2. http://liu.cs.uic.edu/download/data/.

  3. http://jmcauley.ucsd.edu/data/amazon/.

References

  1. Akoglu L, Chandy R, Faloutsos C (2013) Opinion fraud detection in online reviews by network effects. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on weblogs and social media, ICWSM, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 8-11 July 2013

  2. Akoglu L, Tong H, Koutra D (2015) Graph based anomaly detection and description: a survey. Data Min Knowl Discov 29(3):626–688

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Allahbakhsh M, Ignjatovic A, Benatallah B, Beheshti S, Bertino E, Foo N (2013) Collusion detection in online rating systems. In: Web technologies and applications (Lecture notes in computer science), vol 7808. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 196–207

  4. Choo E, Yu T, Chi M (2015) Detecting opinion spammer groups through community discovery and sentiment analysis. In: Data and applications security and privacy XXIX---29th annual IFIP WG 11.3 working conference, DBSec 2015, Fairfax, 13–15 July 2015, pp 170–187

  5. Fayazi A, Lee K, Caverlee J, Squicciarini A (2015) Uncovering crowdsourced manipulation of online reviews. In: Proceedings of the 38th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, Santiago, 9–13 August 2015, pp 233–242

  6. Fei G, Mukherjee A, Liu B, Hsu M, Castellanos M, Ghosh R (2013) Exploiting burstiness in reviews for review spammer detection. In: 7th International AAAI conference on weblogs and social media

  7. Hopcroft J, Tarjan R (1973) Efficient algorithms for graph manipulation [H] (algorithm 447). Commun ACM 16(6):372–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jindal N, Liu B (2008) Opinion spam and analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on web search and data mining, ACM, New York, pp 219–230

  9. Jindal N, Liu B, Lim E (2010) Finding unusual review patterns using unexpected rules. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management , CIKM ’10, New York, pp 1549–1552

  10. Li J, Ott M, Cardie C, Hovy E (2014) Towards a general rule for identifying deceptive opinion spam. In: Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (Vol 1: Long papers), Baltimore, pp 1566–1576

  11. Lim E, Nguyen V, Jindal N, Liu B, Lauw H (2010) Detecting product review spammers using rating behaviors. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management, CIKM ’10, New York, pp 939–948

  12. Mukherjee A, Liu B, Glance N (2012) Spotting fake reviewer groups in consumer reviews. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on world wide web, ACM, New York, pp 191–200

  13. Mukherjee A, Kumar A, Liu B, Wang J, Hsu M, Castellanos M, Ghosh R. (2013) Spotting opinion spammers using behavioral footprints. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, New York, pp 632–640

  14. Mukherjee A, Venkataraman V, Liu B, Glance N (2013) What yelp fake review filter might be doing? In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on weblogs and social media, ICWSM, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 8–11 July 2013

  15. Ott M, Choi Y, Cardie C, Hancock J (2011) Finding deceptive opinion spam by any stretch of the imagination. In: Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, vol 1, Stroudsburg, pp 309–319

  16. Rayana S, Akoglu L (2015) Collective opinion spam detection: bridging review networks and metadata. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, Sydney, 10–13 Aug 2015, pp 985–994

  17. Stoer M, Wagner F (1997) A simple min-cut algorithm. J ACM 44(4):585–591

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang G, Xie S, Liu B, Yu P (2011) Review graph based online store review spammer detection. ICDM 2011:1242–1247

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang Z, Hou T, Song D, Li Z, Kong T (2016) Detecting review spammer groups via bipartite graph projection. Comput J 59(6):861–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Xie S, Wang G, Lin S, Yu P (2012) Review spam detection via time series pattern discovery. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference companion on world wide web, New York, pp 635–636

  21. Xu C, Zhang J (2015) Combating product review spam campaigns via multiple heterogeneous pairwise features. In: Proceedings of the 2015 SIAM international conference on data mining, Vancouver, April 30–May 2 2015, pp 172–180

  22. Xu C, Zhang J (2015) Towards collusive fraud detection in online reviews. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on data mining, ICDM Atlantic City, 14–17 Nov 2015, pp 1051–1056

  23. Xu C, Zhang J, Chang K, Long C (2013) Uncovering collusive spammers in chinese review websites. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on conference on information and knowledge management, ACM, New York, pp 979–988

  24. Xu X, Yuruk N, Feng Z, Schweiger T (2007) SCAN: a structural clustering algorithm for networks. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, San Jose, 12–25 Aug 2007, pp 824–833

  25. Ye J, Akoglu L (2015) Discovering opinion spammer groups by network footprints. In: Machine learning and knowledge discovery in databases (Lecture notes in computer science), vol 9284. Springer International Publishing, pp 267–282

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to Dr. Shebuti Rayana (Stony Brook University) and Prof. Julian McAuley (UCSD) for sharing their high-quality datasets used in this study. We also thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Shenyang Ligong University, Shenyang, China

    Zhuo Wang, Songmin Gu & Xiangnan Zhao

  2. University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, AR, USA

    Xiaowei Xu

Authors
  1. Zhuo Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Songmin Gu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiangnan Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiaowei Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhuo Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, Z., Gu, S., Zhao, X. et al. Graph-based review spammer group detection. Knowl Inf Syst 55, 571–597 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-017-1068-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-017-1068-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation