ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
SMS Scam Detection Application Based on Optical Character Recognition for Image Data Using Unsupervised and Deep Semi-Supervised Learning.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The WeDDa framework for preventing smishing and vishing using protocol agnostic cryptographic trust.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
The growing problem of unsolicited text messages (smishing) and data irregularities necessitates stronger spam detection solutions. This paper explores the development of a sophisticated model designed to identify smishing messages by understanding the complex relationships among words, images, and context-specific factors, areas that remain underexplored in existing research. To address this, we merge a UCI spam dataset of regular text messages with real-world spam data, leveraging OCR technology for comprehensive analysis. The study employs a combination of traditional machine learning models, including K-means, Non-Negative Matrix Factorization, and Gaussian Mixture Models, along with feature extraction techniques such as TF-IDF and PCA. Additionally, deep learning models like RNN-Flatten, LSTM, and Bi-LSTM are utilized. The selection of these models is driven by their complementary strengths in capturing both the linear and non-linear relationships inherent in smishing messages. Machine learning models are chosen for their efficiency in handling structured text data, while deep learning models are selected for their superior ability to capture sequential dependencies and contextual nuances. The performance of these models is rigorously evaluated using metrics like accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score, enabling a comparative analysis between the machine learning and deep learning approaches. Notably, the K-means feature extraction with vectorizer achieved 91.01% accuracy, and the KNN-Flatten model reached 94.13% accuracy, emerging as the top performer. The rationale behind highlighting these models is their potential to significantly improve smishing detection rates. For instance, the high accuracy of the KNN-Flatten model suggests its applicability in real-time spam detection systems, but its computational complexity might limit scalability in large-scale deployments. Similarly, while K-means with vectorizer excels in accuracy, it may struggle with the dynamic and evolving nature of smishing attacks, necessitating continual retraining.
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.