Aug 2026· UNP Journal of Statistics and Data Science· 0 citations· 12 references
TL;DR
The main finding is that under severe imbalance ROC-AUC can be misleading and PR-AUC is more informative; KNN baseline is a balanced detector without tuning, threshold-tuned LR baseline gives the best single operating point, and LR+SMOTE suits cases where recall is the priority.
Abstract
Credit card fraud is a serious threat in the digital financial ecosystem and is characterised by extreme class imbalance, with fraudulent transactions typically below 1%. This study compares two standard classification algorithms, K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN) and Logistic Regression (LR), for detecting fraudulent transactions on the Sparkov dataset (1.85 million transactions; a stratified subsample of 100,000 rows; 0.52% fraud rate), and analyses the effect of the Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE). Preprocessing includes temporal feature engineering, haversine distance, leak-free per-card behavioural features, one-hot and label encoding, and z-score standardisation. Models are evaluated on a stratified 80:20 split using the confusion matrix, accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, ROC-AUC, and PR-AUC, complemented by decision-threshold tuning, confidence intervals over five repetitions, and the McNemar test. No single model dominates across all metrics. At the default threshold, KNN baseline achieves the highest F1 (0.407) and precision (0.540), while LR baseline achieves the highest PR-AUC (0.246); LR+SMOTE leads on recall (0.712) and ROC-AUC (0.861) but with very low precision (0.025). Threshold tuning lets LR baseline reach the best F1 (0.422 at a 0.071 cut-off). McNemar shows the KNN–LR difference is not significant at baseline (p = 0.282) but significant under SMOTE (p < 0.001). The main finding is that under severe imbalance ROC-AUC can be misleading and PR-AUC is more informative; KNN baseline is a balanced detector without tuning, threshold-tuned LR baseline gives the best single operating point, and LR+SMOTE suits cases where recall is the priority.
This study compares the performance of several supervised machine learning models for fraud detection, using a unified data preprocessing pipeline, and found that ensemble learning methods generally outperform single classifiers in both accuracy and minority-class recognition.
Nafiu Yahuza, Ahmad Baita Garko, Abubakar Atiku Muslim et al.· Lead Sci Journal of Manageme...· 0 citations
An automated machine learning framework for credit card fraud detection that addresses the severe class imbalance inherent in fraud datasets through Random Under-Sampling and Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE).
Harshwardhansinh K. Chauhan, Rocky Upadhyay Upadhyay· International Journal of App...· 0 citations
In data environments with severe class imbalances, a machine learning model can be designed as an effective triage tool and its actual value is not only to predict fraud, but also to establish a low-risk release, medium-risk verification, and high-risk manual review of the decision-making process for institutions and t...
Zi-Yue Meng· Advances in Economics, Manag...· 0 citations
Credit card fraud detection is a highly imbalanced classification problem in which headline accuracy
can be misleading. In the held-out Kaggle test file used in this study, only 2,145 of 555,719 transactions
(0.386%) were fraudulent; a classifier that labeled every transaction legitimate would therefore achieve
approxi...
Christian Barravecchio· American Journal of Student...· 0 citations
Credit card fraud detection is complicated by the severe class imbalance typical of transaction data, because fraudulent cases represent only a small proportion of observations. This study develops a neural-network-based model for classifying transactions as legitimate or fraudulent and compares combinations of two ove...
Kalala Kanyinda Norbert, Mukala Patrick, Kafunda Katalayi Pierre· Asian Journal of Research in...· 0 citations
The study shows that ensemble models on the original feature space provide highly accurate and stable fraud detection on this dataset and SHAP analysis reveals that source and destination balances, transaction amount and type are the most influential features.
Merit Chinonso Opara· IIARD INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.