2020
DOI: 10.1109/tcss.2020.2992223
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection of Malicious Social Bots Using Learning Automata With URL Features in Twitter Network

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the proposed method, we assign DNA bases based on the types and content of tweets shared. Since, these features are proved effective in detecting bots 13 , 14 , 29 , 30 , each tweet posted by a user is assigned a unique DNA base as presented in Table 1 (i.e.) A-plain tweet, T- plain mention, G- plain retweet, C- tweet with media/URLs).…”
Section: Proposed Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the proposed method, we assign DNA bases based on the types and content of tweets shared. Since, these features are proved effective in detecting bots 13 , 14 , 29 , 30 , each tweet posted by a user is assigned a unique DNA base as presented in Table 1 (i.e.) A-plain tweet, T- plain mention, G- plain retweet, C- tweet with media/URLs).…”
Section: Proposed Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The trust accuracy of social bot detection among participants is improved by integrating the trust value of the direct relationship determined by the Bayesian theory and the trust value of the indirect relationship determined by the Dempster-Shafer theory. Rout [8] proposed a learning automata-based malicious social bot detection (LA-MSBD) algorithm integrating a trust computation model with URL-based features for identifying trustworthy participants (users) in the Twitter network. Zhang et al [9] proposed a method to combine the old features to obtain more complex features.…”
Section: Social Media Botsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This shows that social media bots often send similar tweets, and there may be a situation of batchpublishing identical tweets, so the similarity index of tweets can better distinguish social media bots from normal users. (8) The average length of original tweets is expressed as x i8 : the style of tweets published by normal users and social media bots is not consistent, and the length of relevant tweets is also different, including original tweets and forwarded tweets. As shown in Figure 2h, the average length of tweets sent by normal users and social media bots is counted.…”
Section: Feature Extractionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experimental outcomes revealed the efficiency of the proposed methodology in terms of precision, recall, and F 1 ‐score. In another study, Rout et al 29 suggested an algorithm by combining Learning Automata (LA) and a trusted computational model and applying URL‐based features to diagnose malicious tweets. Furthermore, in 30 researchers combined Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA) with Salp Swarm Algorithm (SSA) to select an optimum subset of features for Twitter spam profile detection.…”
Section: Background and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%