Pith. sign in

REVIEW

ARMS: Automated rules management system for fraud detection

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2002.06075 v1 pith:IBQI3GRG submitted 2020-02-14 cs.LG cs.AIcs.DBstat.ML

ARMS: Automated rules management system for fraud detection

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.DBstat.ML
keywords rulesdetectionfraudarmssystemstheytransactionsautomated
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Fraud detection is essential in financial services, with the potential of greatly reducing criminal activities and saving considerable resources for businesses and customers. We address online fraud detection, which consists of classifying incoming transactions as either legitimate or fraudulent in real-time. Modern fraud detection systems consist of a machine learning model and rules defined by human experts. Often, the rules performance degrades over time due to concept drift, especially of adversarial nature. Furthermore, they can be costly to maintain, either because they are computationally expensive or because they send transactions for manual review. We propose ARMS, an automated rules management system that evaluates the contribution of individual rules and optimizes the set of active rules using heuristic search and a user-defined loss-function. It complies with critical domain-specific requirements, such as handling different actions (e.g., accept, alert, and decline), priorities, blacklists, and large datasets (i.e., hundreds of rules and millions of transactions). We use ARMS to optimize the rule-based systems of two real-world clients. Results show that it can maintain the original systems' performance (e.g., recall, or false-positive rate) using only a fraction of the original rules (~ 50% in one case, and ~ 20% in the other).

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.