ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2021
Spammer group detection and diversification of customers' reviews.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Online reviews regarding different products or services have become the main source to determine public opinions. Consequently, manufacturers and sellers are extremely concerned with customer reviews as these have a direct impact on their businesses. Unfortunately, to gain profit or fame, spam reviews are written to promote or demote targeted products or services. This practice is known as review spamming. In recent years, Spam Review Detection problem (SRD) has gained much attention from researchers, but still there is a need to identify review spammers who often work collaboratively to promote or demote targeted products. It can severely harm the review system. This work presents the Spammer Group Detection (SGD) method which identifies suspicious spammer groups based on the similarity of all reviewer's activities considering their review time and review ratings. After removing these identified spammer groups and spam reviews, the resulting non-spam reviews are displayed using diversification technique. For the diversification, this study proposed Diversified Set of Reviews (DSR) method which selects diversified set of top-k reviews having positive, negative, and neutral reviews/feedback covering all possible product features. Experimental evaluations are conducted on Roman Urdu and English real-world review datasets. The results show that the proposed methods outperformed the existing approaches when compared in terms of accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.