Effectiveness of Machine Learning Approaches Towards Credibility Assessment of Crowdfunding Projects for Reliable Recommendations
Source abstract
Abstract
Recommendation systems aim to decipher user interests, preferences, and behavioral patterns automatically. However, it becomes trickier to make the most trustworthy and reliable recommendation to users, especially when their hardest earned money is at risk. The credibility of the recommendation is of magnificent importance in crowdfunding project recommendations. This research work devises a hybrid machine learning-based approach for credible crowdfunding projects’ recommendations by wisely incorporating backers’ sentiments and other influential features. The proposed model has four modules: a feature extraction module, a hybrid LDA-LSTM (latent Dirichlet allocation and long short-term memory) based latent topics evaluation module, credibility formulation, and recommendation module. The credibility analysis proffers a process of correlating project creator’s proficiency, reviewers’ sentiments, and their influence to estimate a project’s authenticity level that makes our model robust to unauthentic and untrustworthy projects and profiles. The recommendation module selects projects based on the user’s interests with the highest credible scores and recommends them. The proposed recommendation method harnesses numeric data and sentiment expressions linked with comments, backers’ preferences, profile data, and the creator’s credibility for quantitative examination of several alternative projects. The proposed model’s evaluation depicts that credibility assessment based on the hybrid machine learning approach contributes efficient results (with 98% accuracy) than existing recommendation models. We have also evaluated our credibility assessment technique on different categories of the projects, i.e., suspended, canceled, delivered, and never delivered projects, and achieved satisfactory outcomes, i.e., 93%, 84%, 58%, and 93%, projects respectively accurately classify into our desired range of credibility.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance · Spam and Phishing Detection · Misinformation and Its Impacts
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Computer Engineering, Jeju National University, Jeju 63243, Korea
Department of Computer Education, Teachers College, Jeju National University, Jeju 63243, Korea
References (54)
Show source-provided references
1. Alexander, J.E., and Tate, M.A. (1999). Web Wisdom: How to Evaluate and Create Web Page Quality, L. Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
2. Empirical research in online trust: A review and critical assessment10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00043-0 ↗
3. (2020, October 20). Available online: https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/crowdfunding-market.
4. (2020, October 20). Available online: https://www.statista.com/outlook/335/100/crowdfunding/worldwide.
5. TDAM: A topic-dependent attention model for sentiment analysis10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102084 ↗
6. Karami, A. (2015). Fuzzy Topic Modeling for Medical Corpora, University of Maryland.
7. Asuncion, H.U., Asuncion, A.U., and Taylor, R.N. (2010, January 1–8). Software traceability with topic modeling. Proceedings of the 2010 ACM/IEEE 32nd International Conference on Software Engineering, Cape Town, South Africa.10.1145/1806799.1806817 ↗
8. What are we ‘tweeting’ about obesity? Mapping tweets with topic modeling and Geographic Information System10.1080/15230406.2013.776210 ↗
9. Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of US government arts funding10.1016/j.poetic.2013.08.004 ↗
10. Latent semantic analysis10.1002/aris.1440380105 ↗
11. Brants, T., Chen, F., and Tsochantaridis, I. (2002, January 4–9). Topic-based document segmentation with probabilistic latent semantic analysis. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, McLean, VA, USA.10.1145/584792.584829 ↗
12. Latent Dirichlet Allocation
13. Correlated topic models
14. An introduction to latent semantic analysis10.1080/01638539809545028 ↗
15. Landauer, T.K. (2002, January 7–10). Applications of latent semantic analysis. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Fairfax, VA, USA.
16. Sidorov, G. (2019). Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA): Reduction of Dimensions. Syntactic n-grams in Computational Linguistics, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-14771-6 ↗
17. Sehra, S., Singh, J., and Rai, H. (2017). Using latent semantic analysis to identify research trends in openstreetmap. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 6.10.3390/ijgi6070195 ↗
18. Hofmann, T. (1999). Probabilistic latent semantic analysis. Uncertain. Artif. Intell., 289–296.10.1145/312624.312649 ↗
19. Unsupervised learning by probabilistic latent semantic analysis10.1023/A:1007617005950 ↗
20. Comparison of Dimension Reduction Methods for Automated Essay Grading
21. Liu, S., Xia, C., and Jiang, X. (2010, January 13–17). Efficient Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis with Sparsity Control. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Sydney, NSW, Australia.10.1109/ICDM.2010.136 ↗
22. Romberg, S., Hörster, E., and Lienhart, R. (2009). Multimodal pLSA on Visual Features and Tags, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.10.1109/ICME.2009.5202522 ↗
23. Wu, H., Wang, Y., and Cheng, X. (2008). Incremental Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis for Automatic Question Recommendation, ACM.10.1145/1454008.1454026 ↗
24. Shen, Z.Y., Sun, J., and Shen, Y.D. (2008, January 15–19). Collective Latent Dirichlet Allocation. Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Pisa, Italy.10.1109/ICDM.2008.75 ↗
25. Rosen-Zvi, M., Griffiths, T., Steyvers, M., and Smyth, P. (2004, January 7–11). The author-topic model for authors and documents. Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Banff, AB, Canada.
26. An overview of topic modeling and its current applications in bioinformatics10.1186/s40064-016-3252-8 ↗
27. Wang, X., and McCallum, A. (2006, January 20–23). Topics over time: A non-markov continuous-time model of topical trends. Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Philadelphia, PA, USA.10.1145/1150402.1150450 ↗
28. Topic and role discovery in social networks with experiments on enron and academic email10.1613/jair.2229 ↗
29. Bao, S., Xu, S., Zhang, L., Yan, R., Su, Z., Han, D., and Yu, Y. (2009, January 6–9). Joint Emotion-Topic Modeling for Social Affective Text Mining. Proceedings of the 2009 Ninth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Miami, FL, USA.10.1109/ICDM.2009.94 ↗
30. Applying latent Dirichlet allocation to automatic essay grading10.1007/11816508_13 ↗
31. Bergholz, A., Chang, J., Paaß, G., Reichartz, F., and Strobel, S. (2008, January 21–22). Improved phishing detection using model-based features. Proceedings of the CEAS 2008—The Fifth Conference on Email and Anti-Spam, Mountain View, CA, USA.
32. Btm: Topic modeling over short texts10.1109/TKDE.2014.2313872 ↗
33. Wang, H., Lu, Y., and Zhai, C. (2010, January 25–28). Latent aspect rating analysis on review text data: A rating regression approach. Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Washington, DC, USA.10.1145/1835804.1835903 ↗
34. Park, M.H., Hong, J.H., and Cho, S.B. (2007). Location-based recommendation system using bayesian user’s preference model in mobile devices. International Conference on Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, Springer.10.1007/978-3-540-73549-6_110 ↗
35. Pazzani, M.J., and Billsus, D. (2007). Content-based recommendation systems. the Adaptive Web, Springer.10.1007/978-3-540-72079-9_10 ↗
36. Using Twitter for promotion and branding: A content analysis of local television Twitter sites10.1080/08838151.2011.570824 ↗
37. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
38. Lin, K., Yang, H.F., Liu, K.H., Hsiao, J.H., and Chen, C.S. (2015, January 23–26). Rapid clothing retrieval via deep learning of binary codes and hierarchical search. Proceedings of the 5th ACM on International Conference on Multimedia Retrieval, Shangai, China.10.1145/2671188.2749318 ↗
39. Chiliguano, P., and Fazekas, G. (2016, January 20–25). Hybrid music recommender using content-based and social information. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Shanghai, China.10.1109/ICASSP.2016.7472151 ↗
40. Towards a highly effective and robust Web credibility evaluation system10.1016/j.dss.2015.07.010 ↗
41. Schwarz, J., and Meredith, M. (2011, January 7–12). Augmenting web pages and search results to support credibility assessment. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1145/1978942.1979127 ↗
42. Mitra, T., and Gilbert, E. (2014, January 15–19). The language that gets people to give: Phrases that predict success on kickstarter. Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, Baltimore, MD, USA.10.1145/2531602.2531656 ↗
43. Linguistic style and crowdfunding success among social and commercial entrepreneurs10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.11.001 ↗
44. The determinants of crowdfunding success: A semantic text analytics approach10.1016/j.dss.2016.08.001 ↗
45. Shafqat, W., and Byun, Y.C. (2019). Topic Predictions and Optimized Recommendation Mechanism Based on Integrated Topic Modeling and Deep Neural Networks in Crowdfunding Platforms. Appl. Sci., 9.10.3390/app9245496 ↗
46. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales10.1177/001316446002000104 ↗
47. Mining the voice of employees: A text mining approach to identifying and analyzing job satisfaction factors from online employee reviews10.1016/j.dss.2019.113074 ↗
48. Using Topic Modeling Methods for Short-Text Data: A Comparative Analysis10.3389/frai.2020.00042 ↗
49. Desai, N., Gupta, R., and Truong, K. (2015). Plead or Pitch? The Role of Language in Kickstarter Project Success, Stanford University.
50. Sawhney, K., Tran, C., and Tuason, R. (2016). Using Language to Predict Kickstarter Success, Stanford University.
51. Westerlund, M., Singh, I., Rajahonka, M., and Leminen, S. (2019). Can short-text project summaries predict funding success on crowdfunding platforms?. Proceedings of the ISPIM Conference Proceedings, The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).
52. Detecting fraudulent behavior on crowdfunding platforms: The role of linguistic and content-based cues in static and dynamic contexts10.1080/07421222.2016.1205930 ↗
53. Cumming, D.J., Hornuf, L., Karami, M., and Schweizer, D. (2016). Disentangling Crowdfunding from Fraudfunding, SSRN. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2828919.10.2139/ssrn.2828919 ↗
54. Tran, T., Lee, K., Vo, N., and Choi, H. (August, January 31). Identifying on-time reward delivery projects with estimating delivery duration on kickstarter. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, Sydney, Australia.10.1145/3110025.3110069 ↗