ISSN 2394-5125
 

Research Article 


COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION

Vinaya Keskar.

Abstract
Credit Card Fraud detection is a challenging task for researchers as fraudsters are innovative, quick-moving individuals. Credit Card fraud detection system is challenging as the dataset provided for credit card fraud detection is very imbalanced. The quantity of false exchanges is a lot littler than the real ones. Thus, many of fraud detection models got failed due to these data sets. This research aims to enhance the performance of the minority of credit card fraud on the dataset available. So, K-means clustering, logistic regression, random forest and XG Boost models are performed. This research work incorporates Credit Card Fraud Detection models to study the transactions that end with some frauds. This paper is then used to distinguish whether payment transactions are fraud or not. This research work is to identify false transactions totally while avoiding incorrect fraud classifications. Different algorithms are implemented in this paper. Python Machine Learning libraries are used to perform those algorithms. The models studied in this research work are K-Nearest Neighbor, logistic regression, random forest model, XG Boost model. XG Boost is showing more accuracy than other models. Out of these algorithms, the XG Boost model is preferable over the Random Forest model and Logistic regression model.

Key words: Credit Card Fraud Detection, K-Means Clustering, Logistic Regression, Random Forest, XG Boost Model


 
ARTICLE TOOLS
Abstract
PDF Fulltext
How to cite this articleHow to cite this article
Citation Tools
Related Records
 Articles by Vinaya Keskar
on Google
on Google Scholar


How to Cite this Article
Pubmed Style

Vinaya Keskar. COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION. JCR. 2020; 7(2): 981-986. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178


Web Style

Vinaya Keskar. COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION. http://www.jcreview.com/?mno=40664 [Access: April 17, 2021]. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178


AMA (American Medical Association) Style

Vinaya Keskar. COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION. JCR. 2020; 7(2): 981-986. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178



Vancouver/ICMJE Style

Vinaya Keskar. COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION. JCR. (2020), [cited April 17, 2021]; 7(2): 981-986. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178



Harvard Style

Vinaya Keskar (2020) COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION. JCR, 7 (2), 981-986. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178



Turabian Style

Vinaya Keskar. 2020. COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7 (2), 981-986. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178



Chicago Style

Vinaya Keskar. "COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION." Journal of Critical Reviews 7 (2020), 981-986. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178



MLA (The Modern Language Association) Style

Vinaya Keskar. "COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION." Journal of Critical Reviews 7.2 (2020), 981-986. Print. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178



APA (American Psychological Association) Style

Vinaya Keskar (2020) COMPARING DIFFERENT MODELS FOR CREDIT CARD FRAUD DETECTION. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7 (2), 981-986. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.17.02.178