Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Markus G. Anderle
dblp:36/5001
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2009
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers |
Data mining · 80% Graph data management · 14% Web and social media mining · 4% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Data mining
anomaly detection |
0.2 | 2 | 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection · KDD 2009 Large Scale Detection of Irregularities in Accounting Data · ICDM 2006 |
Data mining › anomaly detection › fraud detection
collusion detection |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection · KDD 2009 |
Data mining › anomaly detection
fraud detection |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection · KDD 2009 |
Graph data management › graph indexing
graph labeling |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection · KDD 2009 |
Data mining › structured data mining
graph mining |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection · KDD 2009 |
Data mining › structured data mining › graph mining › graph learning
node classification |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection · KDD 2009 |
Web and social media mining
social network analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detection · KDD 2009 |
Data mining › predictive modeling
classification |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | Large Scale Detection of Irregularities in Accounting Data · ICDM 2006 |
Machine learning and data management › weak supervision
positive-unlabeled learning |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | Large Scale Detection of Irregularities in Accounting Data · ICDM 2006 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
link analysis · 0.1belief propagation · 0.1outlier detection · 0.1heterogeneous data integration · 0.1classification · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | SNARE: a link analytic system for graph labeling and risk detectionabstractClassifying nodes in networks is a task with a wide range of applications. It can be particularly useful in anomaly and fraud detection. Many resources are invested in the task of fraud detection due to the high cost of fraud, and being able to automatically detect potential fraud quickly and precisely allows human investigators to work more efficiently. Many data analytic schemes have been put into use; however, schemes that bolster link analysis prove promising. This work builds upon the belief propagation algorithm for use in detecting collusion and other fraud schemes. We propose an algorithm called SNARE (Social Network Analysis for Risk Evaluation). By allowing one to use domain knowledge as well as link knowledge, the method was very successful for pinpointing misstated accounts in our sample of general ledger data, with a significant improvement over the default heuristic in true positive rates, and a lift factor of up to 6.5 (more than twice that of the default heuristic). We also apply SNARE to the task of graph labeling in general on publicly-available datasets. We show that with only some information about the nodes themselves in a network, we get surprisingly high accuracy of labels. Not only is SNARE applicable in a wide variety of domains, but it is also robust to the choice of parameters and highly scalable-linearly with the number of edges in a graph. Mary McGlohon, Stephen Bay, Markus G. Anderle, David M. Steier, Christos Faloutsos |
KDD | 3 |
| 2006 | Large Scale Detection of Irregularities in Accounting DataabstractIn recent years, there have been several large accounting frauds where a company's financial results have been intentionally misrepresented by billions of dollars. In response, regulatory bodies have mandated that auditors perform analytics on detailed financial data with the intent of discovering such misstatements. For a large auditing firm, this may mean analyzing millions of records from thousands of clients. This paper proposes techniques for automatic analysis of company general ledgers on such a large scale, identifying irregularities - which may indicate fraud or just honest errors - for additional review by auditors. These techniques have been implemented in a prototype system, called Sherlock, which combines aspects of both outlier detection and classification. In developing Sherlock, we faced three major challenges: developing an efficient process for obtaining data from many heterogeneous sources, training classifiers with only positive and unlabeled examples, and presenting information to auditors in an easily interpretable manner. In this paper, we describe how we addressed these challenges over the past two years and report on experiments evaluating Sherlock. Stephen Bay, Krishna Kumaraswamy, Markus G. Anderle, David M. Steier |
ICDM | 3 |