Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performances of Different Approaches for Fake News Classification: An Analytical Study

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advanced Network Technologies and Intelligent Computing (ANTIC 2021)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1534))

Abstract

The penetration of social and online platforms has opened a new substantial domain of Fake news dissemination in the current time. Also, this dynamic form of data opens up new dimensions for researchers to detect Fake news from the ocean of data. Therefore, Fake news detection has attracted both academia and industry indifferently as research or analytical domain in the concurrent time. Due to data availability, the classification tasks have been tested in different sets and types of data. Detecting Fake news evolves as an actual potential domain to explore with more efficient algorithms and parameter-based modified algorithms. In this work, an analytical sketch has been drawn to compare the performances of different classifiers depending on accuracy and time. Seven classifiers of four different types have been implemented and tested namely, Multilayer Perceptron, Sequential Minimal Optimization, Logistic Regression, Decision Tree, J48, Random Forest and Naïve Bayes Classifier. The analytical evaluation process has been designed with three experimental setups, 10-fold cross-validation, 70% split and 80% split. The separate setups show distinctive outcomes across the algorithms. Naïve-Bayes classifier model shows its prominence along with the Random Forest classifier. However, the and Decision Tree-based classifiers perform differently from earlier knowledge. Furthermore, this paper identifies a different aspect of using testing-training splitting in classifier tasks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Tandoc, E.C., Lim, Z.W., Ling, R.: Defining “Fake News”: a typology of scholarly definitions. Dig. J. 6(2), 137–153 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Zhou, X., Reza, Z.: A survey of fake news. ACM Comput. Surv. 53(1), 1–40 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3395046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Shu, K., Sliva, A., Wang, S., Tang, J., Liu, H.: Fake news detection on social media: a data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD Explor. Newslett. 19(1), 22–36 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3137597.3137600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lazer, D.M.J., et al.: The science of fake news. Science 359(6380), 1094–1096 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang, X., Ghorbani, A.A.: An overview of online fake news: characterization, detection, and discussion. Inf. Process. Manag. 57, 102025 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IPM.2019.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gupta, A., Kumaraguru, P.: Credibility ranking of tweets during high impact events. ACM Int. Conf. Proceeding Ser. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1145/2185354.2185356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mohd Shariff, S., Zhang, X., Sanderson, M.: User perception of information credibility of news on Twitter. In: de Rijke, M., et al. (eds.) ECIR 2014. LNCS, vol. 8416, pp. 513–518. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06028-6_50

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Finding true and credible information on Twitter | IEEE Conference Publication | IEEE Xplore. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6915989. Accessed 30 Aug 2021

  9. Kareem, I., Awan, S.M.: Pakistani media fake news classification using machine learning classifiers. In: 3rd International Conference Innovative Computing (ICIC 2019). (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIC48496.2019.8966734

  10. Liu, S., Liu, S., Ren, L.: Trust or Suspect? An Empirical Ensemble Framework for Fake News Classification

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hakak, S., Alazab, M., Khan, S., Gadekallu, T.R., Maddikunta, P.K.R., Khan, W.Z.: An ensemble machine learning approach through effective feature extraction to classify fake news. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 117, 47–58 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FUTURE.2020.11.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bin Othman, M.F., Yau, T.M.S.: Comparison of different classification techniques using WEKA for breast cancer. In: Ibrahim, F., Osman, N.A.A., Usman, J., Kadri, N.A. (eds.) 3rd Kuala Lumpur International Conference on Biomedical Engineering 2006. IP, vol. 15, pp. 520–523. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68017-8_131

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Rubin, V.L., Conroy, N.J., Chen, Y., Cornwell, S.: Fake News or Truth? Using Satirical Cues to Detect Potentially Misleading News, pp. 7–17 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Komarek, P., Moore, A.: Fast Logistic Regression for Data Mining, Text Classification and Link Detection, pp. 1–8 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Alsari, A.B.A.: Short Text Classification using Machine Learning Techniques (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Al Qadi, L., El Rifai, H., Obaid, S., Elnagar, A.: Arabic text classification of news articles using classical supervised classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on New Trends in Computing Sciences (ICTCS 2019) (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTCS.2019.8923073

  17. Thornton, C., Hutter, F., Hoos, H.H., Leyton-Brown, K.: Auto-WEKA: combined selection and hyperparameter optimization of classification algorithms. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Part F1288, pp. 847–855 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2487575.2487629

  18. Ahmed, A.A.A., Aljabouh, A., Donepudi, P.K., Choi, M.S.: Detecting fake news using machine learning: a systematic literature review. Psychol. Educ. J. 58, 1932–1939 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Castillo, C., Mendoza, M., Poblete, B.: Information credibility on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Companion World Wide Web (WWW 2011), pp. 675–684 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1145/1963405.1963500

  20. Buntain, C., Golbeck, J.: Automatically identifying fake news in popular Twitter Threads. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Smart Cloud, SmartCloud 2017, pp. 208–215 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/SMARTCLOUD.2017.40

  21. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., Aral, S.: The spread of true and false news online. Science 359(6380), 1146–1151 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fakenews Dataset (csv and arff) | Kaggle. https://www.kaggle.com/abkafi/fakenews-datasetcsv-and-arff. Accessed 10 Sept 2021

  23. Bisaillon. Clément: Fake and real news dataset | Kaggle. https://www.kaggle.com/clmentbisaillon/fake-and-real-news-dataset. Accessed 24 Aug 2021

  24. Granik, M., Mesyura, V.: Fake news detection using naive Bayes classifier. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 1st Ukraine Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (UKRCON 2017), pp. 900–903 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/UKRCON.2017.8100379

  25. Keskar, D., Palwe, S., Gupta, A.: Fake news classification on Twitter using flume, N-gram analysis, and decision tree machine learning technique. In: Bhalla, S., Kwan, P., Bedekar, M., Phalnikar, R., Sirsikar, S. (eds.) Proceeding of International Conference on Computational Science and Applications. AIS, pp. 139–147. Springer, Singapore (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0790-8_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Ali, S., Smith, K.A.: On learning algorithm selection for classification. Appl. Soft Comput. 6(2), 119–138 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2004.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Goldberg, Y.: Neural network methods for natural language processing. Synth. Lect. Hum. Lang. Technol. 10(1), 1–309 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2200/S00762ED1V01Y201703HLT037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Saritas, M.M., Yasar, A.: Performance analysis of ANN and Naive Bayes classification algorithm for data classification. Int. J. Intell. Syst. Appl. Eng. 7, 88–91 (2019). https://doi.org/10.18201//IJISAE.2019252786

  29. Pregibon, D.: Logistic regression diagnostics. Ann. Statist. 9, 705–724 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1214/AOS/1176345513

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Kleinbaum, D.G., Klein, M.: Logistic Regression. Springer, New York (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1742-3

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Garner, S.R.: WEKA: the Waikato environment for knowledge analysis. Proc. New Zeal. Comput. Sci. Res. Stud. Conf. 57–64 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Flake, G.W., Flake, G.W., Lawrence, S.: Efficient SVM regression training with SMO. Mach. Learn. 46, 1–3 (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Lee, T.-H., Ullah, A., Wang, R.: Bootstrap aggregating and random forest. In: Fuleky, P. (ed.) Macroeconomic Forecasting in the Era of Big Data. ASTAE, vol. 52, pp. 389–429. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31150-6_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Safavian, S.R., Landgrebe, D.: A survey of decision tree classifier methodology. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 21, 660–674 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1109/21.97458

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Ivan, N., Ahishakiye, E., Omulo, E.O., Taremwa, D.: Crime prediction using decision tree (J48) classification algorithm. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Technol. (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ozbay, F.A., Alatas, B.: Fake news detection within online social media using supervised artificial intelligence algorithms. Phys. A Stat. Mech. Appl. 540, 123174 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSA.2019.123174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaur, G., Chhabra, A.: Improved J48 classification algorithm for the prediction of diabetes. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 98, 975–8887 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Bouckaert, R.R.: Properties of Bayesian belief network learning algorithms. Uncertain. Proc. 1994, 102–109 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-55860-332-5.50018-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Buntine, W.: Theory refinement on Bayesian networks. Uncertain. Proc. 1991, 52–60 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-55860-203-8.50010-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Cohen, J.: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Measur. 20, 37–46 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ben-David, A.: Comparison of classification accuracy using Cohen’s Weighted Kappa. Expert Syst. Appl. 34, 825–832 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESWA.2006.10.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G.: An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics 33, 363 (1977). https://doi.org/10.2307/2529786

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, 1207, Bangladesh

    Md. Abdullah-Al-Kafi, Israt Jahan Tasnova, Md. Wadud Islam & Sumit Kumar Banshal

Authors
  1. Md. Abdullah-Al-Kafi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Israt Jahan Tasnova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Md. Wadud Islam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sumit Kumar Banshal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sumit Kumar Banshal .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Isaac Woungang

  2. Netaji Subhas University of Technology, New Delhi, India

    Sanjay Kumar Dhurandher

  3. ABV-Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management, Gwalior, India

    Kiran Kumar Pattanaik

  4. Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India

    Anshul Verma

  5. Indian Institute of Technology BHU, Varanasi, India

    Pradeepika Verma

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Abdullah-Al-Kafi, M., Tasnova, I.J., Wadud Islam, M., Banshal, S.K. (2022). Performances of Different Approaches for Fake News Classification: An Analytical Study. In: Woungang, I., Dhurandher, S.K., Pattanaik, K.K., Verma, A., Verma, P. (eds) Advanced Network Technologies and Intelligent Computing. ANTIC 2021. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1534. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96040-7_53

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96040-7_53

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-96039-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-96040-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation