logo

SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 48 , Issue 2 : 177-186(2018) https://doi.org/10.1360/N112017-00112

Unorganized malicious attacks detection

More info
  • ReceivedMay 16, 2017
  • AcceptedMay 31, 2017
  • PublishedJan 15, 2018

Abstract


Funded by

国家自然科学基金(61333014)


References

[1] Bresler G, Chen G, Shah D. A latent source model for online collaborative filtering. In: Proceedings of the 28th Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Montreal, 2014. 3347--3355. Google Scholar

[2] Li B, Yang Q, Xue G R. Transfer learning for collaborative filtering via a rating-matrix generative model. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Machine Learning, Montreal, 2009. 617--624. Google Scholar

[3] Rao N, Yu H F, Ravikumar P, et al. Collaborative filtering with graph information: consistency and scalable methods. In: Proceedings of the 29th Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Montreal, 2015. 2098--2106. Google Scholar

[4] Gunes I, Kaleli C, Bilge A, et al. Shilling attacks against recommender systems: a comprehensive survey. Artif Intell Rev, 2014, 42: 767--799. Google Scholar

[5] Ling G, King I, Lyu M R. A unified framework for reputation estimation in online rating systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Beijing, 2013. 2670--2676. Google Scholar

[6] Hurley N J, Cheng Z P, Zhang M. Statistical attack detection. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, New York, 2009. 149--156. Google Scholar

[7] Mehta B. Unsupervised shilling detection for collaborative filtering. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, 2007. 1402--1407. Google Scholar

[8] Goldberg D, Nichols D, Oki B M, et al. Using collaborative filtering to weave an information tapestry. Commun ACM, 1992, 35: 61--70. Google Scholar

[9] Singhal A. Modern information retrieval: a brief overview. IEEE Data Eng Bull, 2001, 24: 35--43. Google Scholar

[10] Adomavicius G, Singhal A. Toward the next generation of recommender systems: a survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng, 2005, 17: 734--749. Google Scholar

[11] Zhang J Y, Pu P. A recursive prediction algorithm for collaborative filtering recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Minneapolis, 2007. 57--64. Google Scholar

[12] Deshpande M, Karypis G. Item-based top-n recommendation algorithms. ACM Trans Inf Syst, 2004, 22: 143--177. Google Scholar

[13] Ekstrand M D, Riedl J T, Konstan J A. Collaborative filtering recommender systems. Found Trends Human-Comput Interact, 2011, 4: 81--173. Google Scholar

[14] Kleinberg J, Sandler M. Using mixture models for collaborative filtering. J Comput Syst Sci, 2008, 74: 49--69. Google Scholar

[15] Salakhutdinov R, Mnih A. Bayesian probabilistic matrix factorization using markov chain monte carlo. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, Helsinki, 2008. 880--887. Google Scholar

[16] Salakhutdinov R, Mnih A, Hinton G. Restricted boltzmann machines for collaborative filtering. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Machine Learning, Corvallis, 2007. 791--798. Google Scholar

[17] Mobasher B, Burke R, Bhaumik R, et al. Attacks and remedies in collaborative recommendation. Intell Syst, 2009, 22: 56--63. Google Scholar

[18] Bhaumik R, Mobasher B, Burke R D. A clustering approach to unsupervised attack detection in collaborative recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Data Mining, Vancouver, 2011. 181--187. Google Scholar

[19] Bryan K, OMahony M, Cunningham P. Unsupervised retrieval of attack profiles in collaborative recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Lausanne, 2008. 155--162. Google Scholar

[20] Mehta B, Nejdl W. Unsupervised strategies for shilling detection and robust collaborative filtering. User Model User-Adapted Interact, 2009, 19: 65--97. Google Scholar

[21] Bhaumik R, Williams C, Mobasher B, et al. Securing collaborative filtering against malicious attacks through anomaly detection. In: Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Intelligent Techniques for Web Personalization, Boston, 2006. Google Scholar

[22] Lam S K, Riedl J. Shilling recommender systems for fun and profit. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web, New York, 2004. 393--402. Google Scholar

[23] Candes E J, Li X D, Ma Y, et al. Robust principal component analysis? J ACM, 2011, 58: 1--37. Google Scholar

[24] Pang M, Gao W, Tao M, et al. Unorganized malicious attacks detection,. arXiv Google Scholar

  • Figure 1

    General form of an attack profile

  • Figure 2

    (Color online) Effectiveness of unorganized malicious attacks. (a) Prediction shift; (b) hits

  • Figure 3

    (Color online) Detection (a) precision and (b) recall on MovieLens 100K under unorganized malicious attacks. The spam ratio varies from 0.02 to 0.2

  • Table 1   Detection precision, recall and $F1$ on MovieLens under unorganized malicious attacks based on traditional strategies
    MovieLens 100 KMovieLens 1 M
    $P$ $R$ $F$1 $P$ $R$ $F$1
    RPCA0.908$\pm$0.0100.422$\pm$0.0480.575$\pm$0.0470.342$\pm$0.0030.558$\pm$0.0280.424$\pm$0.009
    N-P0.774$\pm$0.0150.641$\pm$0.0460.701$\pm$0.0320.711$\pm$0.0070.478$\pm$0.0180.572$\pm$0.014
    k-means0.723$\pm$0.1710.224$\pm$0.0670.341$\pm$0.0920.000$\pm$0.0000.000$\pm$0.0000.000$\pm$0.000
    PCAVarSel0.774$\pm$0.0090.587$\pm$0.0240.668$\pm$0.0190.278$\pm$0.0070.622$\pm$0.0220.384$\pm$0.011
    MF-based0.911$\pm$0.0090.814$\pm$0.0080.860$\pm$0.0090.407$\pm$0.0050.365$\pm$0.0040.385$\pm$0.005
  • Table 2   Detection precision, recall and $F1$ on MovieLens which are under general unorganized malicious attacks
    MovieLens 100 KMovieLens 1 M
    $P$ $R$ $F$1 $P$ $R$ $F$1
    RPCA0.797$\pm$0.0460.659$\pm$0.0970.721$\pm$0.0970.635$\pm$0.0120.391$\pm$0.0220.484$\pm$0.015
    N-P0.244$\pm$0.1240.145$\pm$0.0890.172$\pm$0.0840.273$\pm$0.0200.099$\pm$0.0310.144$\pm$0.035
    k-means0.767$\pm$0.0290.234$\pm$0.0420.357$\pm$0.0510.396$\pm$0.0260.300$\pm$0.0390.341$\pm$0.035
    PCAVarSel0.481$\pm$0.0270.168$\pm$0.0170.248$\pm$0.0230.120$\pm$0.0060.225$\pm$0.0120.157$\pm$0.008
    MF-based0.556$\pm$0.0230.496$\pm$0.0210.524$\pm$0.0220.294$\pm$0.0120.264$\pm$0.0100.278$\pm$0.011
  • Table 3   Detection precision, recall and $F1$ compared with other algorithms on dataset Douban 10 K
    RPCA N-P k-means PCAVarSel MF-based
    $P$0.5350.2500.3210.2400.767
    $R$0.4720.2000.5140.3430.657
    $F$10.5020.2220.3960.2820.708