Plastic Card Fraud Detection using Peer Group Analysis
Description
Fraud detection describesmethods that attempt to identify fraudulent activity as quickly
as possible. From a statistical methods perspective there are broadly two approaches to
fraud detection [1]. These relate to whether we intend to detect known examples of
fraudulent activity or whether we intend to detect novel forms of fraudulent behaviour.
In the former case pattern matching techniques are used in the latter case anomaly
detection techniques are deployed. Peer group analysis is an unsupervised method for monitoring behaviour over time
[2] and it can be used for anomaly detection [3]. In the context of plastic card fraud
detection, peer groups are built for each account, where a peer group is collection of
other accounts that behave similarly. The subsequent behaviour of each account is measured
in relation to its peer group. Should an account’s behaviour deviate strongly from
its peer group then the account is flagged as anomalous and its recent transactions are
flagged as potential frauds. This approach differs from the usual anomaly detection
methods where each account’s current behaviour is measured in relation to its own past
behaviour.
We show how to apply peer group analysis to times series that consist of timealigned
multivariate continuous data. The initial analysis comprises of a method to determine
the peer group members for each time series. For this we need to compare
time series [4], we describe one method that is useful for plastic card transaction data.
Once we have the peer groups, the analysis then comprises of a method for tracking a
time series with respect to its peer group. An anomaly is said to have occurred should
the separation between the time series and its peer group exceed some externally set
threshold.
Account histories of plastic card transaction data are neither time aligned nor do
they consist of purely continuous data. A transaction can occur at any time and each
transaction has associated with it a record containing a large amount of information.
This enables the card issuer to distinguish between the large number of possible transaction
types that can occur. For example an account holder who checks their balance
at an ATM (an example of a transaction where no money is transferred) or an account
holder who purchases a rental car but was not present at the point of sale. We describe
one way to time align different account transaction histories and to transform some
pertinent information into continuous variables.
We summarise experiments performed using peer group analysis on real credit card
transaction data. In particular we examine the effect that missed fraudulent transactions
have on the performance of the peer groups. We describe a method for robustifying
against fraudulent transactions contaminating peer groups.We present our results using
a new measure of performance that has been designed specifically for plastic card fraud
[5].
Not all accounts can be tracked well enough by their respective peer groups to usefully
identify anomalous behaviour.We describe a measure of peer group quality which
we use to identify accounts that are more likely to be successfully analysed using peer
groups.
| Slides | |
| 0:00 | Plastic Card Fraud Detection using Peer Group analysis |
| 0:00 | EPSRC Think Crime Initiative |
| 0:08 | ThinkCrime Team |
| 0:33 | Overview |
| 1:16 | Plastic Card Fraud |
| 1:19 | Consequences of Fraud |
| 1:32 | Consequences of Fraud |
| 2:09 | Patterns Of Fraud (1) |
| 2:16 | Patterns Of Fraud (2) |
| 2:45 | Patterns Of Fraud (3) |
| 3:11 | Determining when Fraud has occurred (1) |
| 3:45 | Determining when Fraud has occurred (2) |
| 4:07 | Determining when Fraud has occurred (3) |
| 4:13 | Determining when Fraud has occurred (4) |
| 4:57 | Challenges of Fraud Detection (1) |
| 5:08 | Challenges of Fraud Detection (2) |
| 7:18 | Peer Group Analysis - Introduction |
| 7:19 | Approaches to Fraud Detection (1) |
| 7:33 | Approaches to Fraud Detection (2) |
| 7:59 | Anomaly Detection |
| 8:40 | Peer Group Analysis |
| 9:19 | Anomaly Detection to Peer Groups I |
| 10:25 | Anomaly Detection to Peer Groups II |
| 10:59 | Anomaly Detection to Peer Groups III |
| 11:48 | Peer Groups Example (1) |
| 12:37 | Peer Groups Example (2) |
| 13:16 | Peer Groups Example (3) |
| 13:26 | Peer Groups Example (4) |
| 13:46 | Peer Groups Example (5) |
| 14:22 | Peer Group Analysis |
| 14:24 | Detecting Anomalies (1) |
| 15:04 | Detecting Anomalies (2) |
| 15:49 | Robustifying Peer Groups (1) |
| 16:38 | Robustifying Peer Groups (2) |
| 16:51 | Robustifying Peer Groups (3) |
| 17:11 | Robustifying Peer Groups (4) |
| 17:20 | Peer Group Quality |
| 17:59 | Whitening the Population |
| 18:31 | Building Peer Groups |
| 19:40 | The Dataset |
| 19:41 | Real Data |
| 20:15 | Transaction Details |
| 21:37 | Merchant Category Codes |
| 22:58 | Applying Peer Group Analysis |
| 23:00 | Time Alignment & Feature Extraction (1) |
| 24:10 | Time Alignment & Feature Extraction (2) |
| 24:39 | Outlier Detection from Peer Groups |
| 25:54 | Active and Inactive Accounts (1) |
| 26:19 | Active and Inactive Accounts (2) |
| 26:51 | Building Peer Groups (1) |
| 27:32 | Building Peer Groups (2) |
| 27:55 | Building Peer Groups (3) |
| 29:08 | Performance Evaluation |
| 29:11 | Performance Criteria |
| 29:38 | Performance Metric |
| 30:22 | Performance Curve |
| 30:45 | Average Performance Curve |
| 32:07 | Experiments & Results |
| 32:08 | Experiments |
| 32:58 | Effect of Fraud Contamination using an Oracle (1) |
| 33:29 | Effect of Fraud Contamination using an Oracle (2) |
| 33:49 | Building Peer Groups (1) |
| 34:12 | Building Peer Groups (2) |
| 34:19 | Building Peer Groups (3) |
| 34:21 | Building Peer Groups (4) |
| 34:24 | Building Peer Groups (5) |
| 34:36 | Varying Length of Summary Statistic Window (1) |
| 34:48 | Varying Length of Summary Statistic Window (2) |
| 34:49 | Varying Length of Summary Statistic Window (3) |
| 34:53 | Varying Length of Summary Statistic Window (4) |
| 34:55 | Varying Length of Summary Statistic Window (5) |
| 35:08 | Global Outlier Detector |
| 35:36 | Peer Groups Performance (1) |
| 35:44 | Peer Groups Performance (2) |
| 35:56 | Peer Groups Performance (3) |
| 36:04 | Peer Groups Performance (4) |
| 36:20 | Peer Groups Versus Global Outlier Detector (1) |
| 37:12 | Peer Groups Versus Global Outlier Detector (2) |
| 37:34 | Conclusions & Current Work |
| 37:35 | Conclusions |
Lecture rating
| People found this lecture: | ||
| Worth seeing | ||
| because it is: | ||
| Valuable and informative | ||
| Well presented | ||
| Easily understandable | ||
| Acceptably recorded | ||
| You need to login to cast your vote. | ||
Report a problem or upload files
If you have found a problem with this lecture or would like to send us extra material, articles, exercises, etc., please use our ticket system to describe your request and upload the data.Enter your e-mail into the 'Cc' field, and we will keep you updated with your request's status.
Link this page
Would you like to put a link to this lecture on your homepage?Go ahead! Copy the HTML snippet !




