Combat AI With AI: Counteract Machine-Generated Fake Restaurant Reviews
on Social Media
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.07731v3
- Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 16:40:55 GMT
- Title: Combat AI With AI: Counteract Machine-Generated Fake Restaurant Reviews
on Social Media
- Authors: Alessandro Gambetti, Qiwei Han
- Abstract summary: We propose to leverage the high-quality elite Yelp reviews to generate fake reviews from the OpenAI GPT review creator.
We apply the model to predict non-elite reviews and identify the patterns across several dimensions.
We show that social media platforms are continuously challenged by machine-generated fake reviews.
- Score: 77.34726150561087
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Recent advances in generative models such as GPT may be used to fabricate
indistinguishable fake customer reviews at a much lower cost, thus posing
challenges for social media platforms to detect these machine-generated fake
reviews. We propose to leverage the high-quality elite restaurant reviews
verified by Yelp to generate fake reviews from the OpenAI GPT review creator
and ultimately fine-tune a GPT output detector to predict fake reviews that
significantly outperform existing solutions. We further apply the model to
predict non-elite reviews and identify the patterns across several dimensions,
such as review, user and restaurant characteristics, and writing style. We show
that social media platforms are continuously challenged by machine-generated
fake reviews, although they may implement detection systems to filter out
suspicious reviews.
Related papers
- What Matters in Explanations: Towards Explainable Fake Review Detection Focusing on Transformers [45.55363754551388]
Customers' reviews and feedback play crucial role on e-commerce platforms like Amazon, Zalando, and eBay.
There is a prevailing concern that sellers often post fake or spam reviews to deceive potential customers and manipulate their opinions about a product.
We propose an explainable framework for detecting fake reviews with high precision in identifying fraudulent content with explanations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-24T13:26:02Z) - AiGen-FoodReview: A Multimodal Dataset of Machine-Generated Restaurant
Reviews and Images on Social Media [57.70351255180495]
AiGen-FoodReview is a dataset of 20,144 restaurant review-image pairs divided into authentic and machine-generated.
We explore unimodal and multimodal detection models, achieving 99.80% multimodal accuracy with FLAVA.
The paper contributes by open-sourcing the dataset and releasing fake review detectors, recommending its use in unimodal and multimodal fake review detection tasks, and evaluating linguistic and visual features in synthetic versus authentic data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-16T20:57:36Z) - Shilling Black-box Review-based Recommender Systems through Fake Review
Generation [20.162253355141893]
Review-Based Recommender Systems (RBRS) have attracted increasing research interest due to their ability to alleviate well-known cold-start problems.
We argue that such a reliance on reviews may instead expose systems to the risk of being shilled.
We propose the first generation-based model for shilling attacks against RBRSs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-27T12:32:36Z) - To ChatGPT, or not to ChatGPT: That is the question! [78.407861566006]
This study provides a comprehensive and contemporary assessment of the most recent techniques in ChatGPT detection.
We have curated a benchmark dataset consisting of prompts from ChatGPT and humans, including diverse questions from medical, open Q&A, and finance domains.
Our evaluation results demonstrate that none of the existing methods can effectively detect ChatGPT-generated content.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-04T03:04:28Z) - Mitigating Human and Computer Opinion Fraud via Contrastive Learning [0.0]
We introduce the novel approach towards fake text reviews detection in collaborative filtering recommender systems.
The existing algorithms concentrate on detecting the fake reviews, generated by language models and ignore the texts, written by dishonest users.
We propose the contrastive learning-based architecture, which utilizes the user demographic characteristics, along with the text reviews, as the additional evidence against fakes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-08T12:02:28Z) - Fake or Genuine? Contextualised Text Representation for Fake Review
Detection [0.4724825031148411]
This paper proposes a new ensemble model that employs transformer architecture to discover the hidden patterns in a sequence of fake reviews and detect them precisely.
The experimental results using semi-real benchmark datasets showed the superiority of the proposed model over state-of-the-art models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-12-29T00:54:47Z) - Identifying Hijacked Reviews [21.600163117735857]
Review Hijacking is a new review manipulation tactic in which unethical sellers "hijack" an existing product page.
We propose a framework to generate synthetically labeled data for review hijacking by swapping products and reviews.
We then evaluate the potential of both a Twin LSTM network and BERT sequence pair to distinguish legitimate reviews from hijacked ones using this data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-07-07T20:43:36Z) - Can We Automate Scientific Reviewing? [89.50052670307434]
We discuss the possibility of using state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) models to generate first-pass peer reviews for scientific papers.
We collect a dataset of papers in the machine learning domain, annotate them with different aspects of content covered in each review, and train targeted summarization models that take in papers to generate reviews.
Comprehensive experimental results show that system-generated reviews tend to touch upon more aspects of the paper than human-written reviews.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-01-30T07:16:53Z) - Automating App Review Response Generation [67.58267006314415]
We propose a novel approach RRGen that automatically generates review responses by learning knowledge relations between reviews and their responses.
Experiments on 58 apps and 309,246 review-response pairs highlight that RRGen outperforms the baselines by at least 67.4% in terms of BLEU-4.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-02-10T05:23:38Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.