2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113383
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection of malicious social bots: A survey and a refined taxonomy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
7

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 122 publications
(216 reference statements)
0
16
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…It was also shown that machine learning methods and, more specifically, random forest classifiers are the most commonly used for detecting social bots in Twitter users. Majd Latah [16] presented a comprehensive review focusing on malicious social bots' stealthy manner and their detection techniques. The author precisely reviewed detection approaches, which are graphbased, machine learning based, and emerging approaches.…”
Section: Related Surveysmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It was also shown that machine learning methods and, more specifically, random forest classifiers are the most commonly used for detecting social bots in Twitter users. Majd Latah [16] presented a comprehensive review focusing on malicious social bots' stealthy manner and their detection techniques. The author precisely reviewed detection approaches, which are graphbased, machine learning based, and emerging approaches.…”
Section: Related Surveysmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, verified accounts are guaranteed to be human users. Moreover, the ratio of followers to following and the age of the account are considered discriminative characteristics in detecting bots since bots generally mass-follow and have short life span [16]. The following features are mainly used by tweetbased bot detection techniques to distinguish between tweetbased bots and humans accounts [23]:…”
Section: Tweet-based Bot Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Undeutsch Hypothesis [234] Factual contents differ in quality and style from fallacy Source (User) Related Theories Expertise Community/ Peer Influence Rare Behavior [18] Unusual behavior than majority Expertise: [235], [236] Synchronized Behavior [18] All such user show/ follow the similar behavior patterns.…”
Section: Completely Distinct Considerations Recommended (Not Included In Any Research Category)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It becomes more challenging when source/user authenticity is hidden from the viewer, though user anonymity is one of the prose of microblogs. Unfortunately, it also welcome some other issues like: user's coordinated behavior [18], follower's fallacy [19], etc. It not only affects the quality of microblogs content but also introduces another challenge for gauging the source credibility.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…People may write this type of fake reviews to promote their products or to defame their competitors' products. • Bot detection [82]. Social media is now populated by small programs designed to exhibit human-like behavior called social bots [83] that automatically spread posts to give the impression that a given piece of information is highly popular and endorsed by many people.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%