2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-30933-0_38
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A State of Art Survey on Shilling Attack in Collaborative Filtering Based Recommendation System

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Labeled data is required to perform supervised learning and it is not usual to have it, so current research aims towards unsupervised learning detectors. [27] first make use of generic statistical attributes (RDMA, DegSim and LengthVar) to identify fake profiles from genuine ones, then they use the obtained values to train a supervised model for detection of malicious profiles.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Labeled data is required to perform supervised learning and it is not usual to have it, so current research aims towards unsupervised learning detectors. [27] first make use of generic statistical attributes (RDMA, DegSim and LengthVar) to identify fake profiles from genuine ones, then they use the obtained values to train a supervised model for detection of malicious profiles.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The described attack represents only one possible attack to RSs. The profile injection attack (also known as the shilling attack) is undoubtedly the most discussed type of attack in literature [23,29,38]. As the name suggests, the profile injection attack seeks to mislead the RS by injecting well-crafted fake users into the system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 2014, [28] produced one of the most comprehensive surveys on the topic, but it presents details on the attacks only until 2011. The survey in [23] focuses only on the statistical measures used in the detection and the basic shilling attack methods. Kaur et al [29] perform experimental evaluation comparing the most commonly used shilling attack methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%