skip to main content
10.1145/1557019.1557155acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection

Published: 28 June 2009 Publication History

Abstract

Classifying nodes in networks is a task with a wide range of applications. It can be particularly useful in anomaly and fraud detection. Many resources are invested in the task of fraud detection due to the high cost of fraud, and being able to automatically detect potential fraud quickly and precisely allows human investigators to work more efficiently. Many data analytic schemes have been put into use; however, schemes that bolster link analysis prove promising. This work builds upon the belief propagation algorithm for use in detecting collusion and other fraud schemes. We propose an algorithm called SNARE (Social Network Analysis for Risk Evaluation). By allowing one to use domain knowledge as well as link knowledge, the method was very successful for pinpointing misstated accounts in our sample of general ledger data, with a significant improvement over the default heuristic in true positive rates, and a lift factor of up to 6.5 (more than twice that of the default heuristic). We also apply SNARE to the task of graph labeling in general on publicly-available datasets. We show that with only some information about the nodes themselves in a network, we get surprisingly high accuracy of labels. Not only is SNARE applicable in a wide variety of domains, but it is also robust to the choice of parameters and highly scalable-linearly with the number of edges in a graph.

Supplementary Material

JPG File (p1265-mcglohon.jpg)
MP4 File (p1265-mcglohon.mp4)

References

[1]
L. Adamic and N. Glance. The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: Divided they blog, 2005.
[2]
S. Bay, K. Kumaraswamy, M. G. Anderle, R. Kumar, and D. M. Steier. Large scale detection of irregularities in accounting data. In ICDM '06: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Data Mining, pages 75--86, Washington, DC, USA, 2006. IEEE Computer Society.
[3]
R. Behrman and K. Carley. Modeling the structure and effectiveness of intelligence organizations: Dynamic information flow simulation. In Proceedings of the 8th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium., 2003.
[4]
T. Bell and J. Carcello. A decision aid of assessing the likelihood of fraudulent financial reporting. Auditing: A journal of practice and theory, 19:169--184, 2000.
[5]
M. Beneish. The detection of earnings manipulation. Financial Analysts Journal, 55(5):24--36, 1999.
[6]
R. Bolton and D. Hand. Statistical fraud detection: A review, 2002.
[7]
R. J. Bolton and D. J. Hand. Unsupervised profiling methods for fraud detection, 2001.
[8]
T. Cohn. Scaling Conditional Random Fields for Natural Language Processing. PhD thesis, University of Melbourne, 2007.
[9]
P. M. Dechow, W. Ge, C. R. Larson, and R. G. Sloan. Predicting material account manipulations. AAA 2008 Financial Accounting and Reporting Section (FARS), 2008.
[10]
D. Dooley and G. Lamont. PwC 2005 securities litigation study. Technical report, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2006.
[11]
A. Fast, L. Friedland, M. Maier, B. Taylor, D. Jensen, H. G. Goldberg, and J. Komoroske. Relational data pre-processing techniques for improved securities fraud detection. In KDD '07: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 941--949, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM.
[12]
T. Fawcett and F. J. Provost. Adaptive fraud detection. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 1(3):291--316, 1997.
[13]
L. Friedland and D. Jensen. Finding tribes: identifying close-knit individuals from employment patterns. In KDD '07: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 290--299, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM Press.
[14]
W. Golden, S. Skalak, and M. Clayton. A Guide to Forensic Accounting Investigation. John Wiley&Sons, Hoboken, N.J., 2006.
[15]
H. Grove and T. Cook. A statistical analysis of financial ratio red flags. Oil, Gas and Energy Quarterly, 53(2):3212--3346, 2004.
[16]
R. Guha, R. Kumar, P. Raghavan, and A. Tomkins. Propagation of trust and distrust. In WWW '04: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 403--412, New York, NY, USA, 2004. ACM.
[17]
S. Hill and F. Provost. The myth of the double-blind review?: author identification using only citations. SIGKDD Explor. Newsl., 5(2):179--184, December 2003.
[18]
S. Hill, F. Provost, and C. Volinsky. Network-based marketing: Identifying likely adopters via consumer networks. Statistical Science, 22(2):256--275, 2006.
[19]
D. Jensen, J. Neville, and B. Gallagher. Why collective inference improves relational classification. In KDD '07: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, 2004.
[20]
J. M. Kleinberg. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46(5):604--632, 1999.
[21]
S. A. Macskassy and F. Provost. Suspicion scoring based on guilt-by-association, collective inference, and focused data access. In Proceedings of the NAACSOS Conference, June 2005.
[22]
C. W. Mulford and E. E. Comiskey. The Financial Numbers Game: Detecting Creative Accounting Practices. John Wiley&Sons, Hoboken, N.J., 2002.
[23]
J. Neville, O. Simsek, D. Jensen, J. Komoroske, K. Palmer, and H. Goldberg. Using relational knowledge discovery to prevent securities fraud. In KDD '05: Proceeding of the eleventh ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery in data mining, pages 449--458, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM Press.
[24]
L. Page, S. Brin, R. Motwani, and T. Winograd. The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. Technical report, Stanford Digital Library Technologies Project, 1998.
[25]
S. Pandit, D. H. Chau, S. Wang, and C. Faloutsos. Netprobe: a fast and scalable system for fraud detection in online auction networks. In WWW '07: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 201--210, New York, NY, USA, 2007.
[26]
H. Schilit. Financial Shenanigans: How to Detect Accounting Gimmicks and Fraud in Financial Reports. McGraw-Hill, 2002.
[27]
S. Skalak and C. Nestler. Global economic crime survey 2005. Technical report, PricewaterhouseCooper LLP, 2005.
[28]
J. Wells. Corporate Fraud Handbook: Prevention and Detection. John Wiley&Sons, Hoboken, N.J., 2004.
[29]
J. S. Yedidia, W. T. Freeman, and Y. Weiss. Understanding belief propagation and its generalizations, pages 239--269. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 2003.
[30]
X. Zhu. Semi-supervised learning with graphs. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2005.
[31]
C. N. Ziegler and G. Lausen. Propagation models for trust and distrust in social networks. Information Systems Frontiers, 7(4-5):337--358, 2005.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)DP-GCN: Node Classification by Connectivity and Local Topology Structure on Real-World NetworkACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data10.1145/364946018:6(1-20)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Real-time anomaly detection in sky quality meter data using probabilistic exponential weighted moving averageInternational Journal of Data Science and Analytics10.1007/s41060-024-00535-8Online publication date: 20-Apr-2024
  • (2023)Artificial Intelligence Co-Piloted AuditingSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4444763Online publication date: 2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    KDD '09: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
    June 2009
    1426 pages
    ISBN:9781605584959
    DOI:10.1145/1557019
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 28 June 2009

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. anomaly detection
    2. belief propagation
    3. social networks

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    KDD09

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,133 of 8,635 submissions, 13%

    Upcoming Conference

    KDD '25

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)18
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
    Reflects downloads up to 08 Mar 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)DP-GCN: Node Classification by Connectivity and Local Topology Structure on Real-World NetworkACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data10.1145/364946018:6(1-20)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2024
    • (2024)Real-time anomaly detection in sky quality meter data using probabilistic exponential weighted moving averageInternational Journal of Data Science and Analytics10.1007/s41060-024-00535-8Online publication date: 20-Apr-2024
    • (2023)Artificial Intelligence Co-Piloted AuditingSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4444763Online publication date: 2023
    • (2023)Deep Weakly-supervised Anomaly DetectionProceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining10.1145/3580305.3599302(1795-1807)Online publication date: 6-Aug-2023
    • (2023)Financial transaction fraud detector based on imbalance learning and graph neural networkApplied Soft Computing10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110984149(110984)Online publication date: Dec-2023
    • (2023)Few-Shot Anomaly Detection in Text with Deviation LearningNeural Information Processing10.1007/978-981-99-8082-6_33(425-438)Online publication date: 15-Nov-2023
    • (2023)CenAD: Collaborative Embedding Network for Anomaly Detection with Leveraging Partially Observed AnomaliesNeural Information Processing10.1007/978-981-99-8070-3_32(418-432)Online publication date: 15-Nov-2023
    • (2022)A Novel Method for Identifying Competitors Using a Financial Transaction NetworkIEEE Transactions on Engineering Management10.1109/TEM.2019.293166069:4(845-860)Online publication date: Aug-2022
    • (2022)Situation-Aware Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detection Through Active Learning and Contrast VAE-Based Models in Large Distributed SystemsIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications10.1109/JSAC.2022.319134140:9(2746-2765)Online publication date: Sep-2022
    • (2022)Graph-based PU learning for binary and multiclass classification without class priorKnowledge and Information Systems10.1007/s10115-022-01702-864:8(2141-2169)Online publication date: 30-Jun-2022
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media