Christian Winter

Oren Halvani, Christian Winter, Lukas Graner

Authorship verification (AV) is a research subject in the field of digital text forensics that concerns itself with the question, whether two documents have been written by the same person. During the past two decades, an increasing number of proposed AV approaches can be observed. However, a closer look at the respective studies reveals that the underlying characteristics of these methods are rarely addressed, which raises doubts regarding their applicability in real forensic settings. The objective of this paper is to fill this gap by proposing clear criteria and properties that aim to improve the characterization of existing and future AV approaches. Based on these properties, we conduct three experiments using 12 existing AV approaches, including the current state of the art. The examined methods were trained, optimized and evaluated on three self-compiled corpora, where each corpus focuses on a different aspect of applicability. Our results indicate that part of the methods are able to cope with very challenging verification cases such as 250 characters long informal chat conversations (72.7% accuracy) or cases in which two scientific documents were written at different times with an average difference of 15.6 years (> 75% accuracy). However, we also identified that all involved methods are prone to cross-topic verification cases.

Oren Halvani, Christian Winter, Lukas Graner

Retrieving indexed documents, not by their topical content but their writing style opens the door for a number of applications in information retrieval (IR). One application is to retrieve textual content of a certain author X, where the queried IR system is provided beforehand with a set of reference texts of X. Authorship verification (AV), which is a research subject in the field of digital text forensics, is suitable for this purpose. The task of AV is to determine if two documents (i.e. an indexed and a reference document) have been written by the same author X. Even though AV represents a unary classification problem, a number of existing approaches consider it as a binary classification task. However, the underlying classification model of an AV method has a number of serious implications regarding its prerequisites, evaluability, and applicability. In our comprehensive literature review, we observed several misunderstandings regarding the differentiation of unary and binary AV approaches that require consideration. The objective of this paper is, therefore, to clarify these by proposing clear criteria and new properties that aim to improve the characterization of existing and future AV approaches. Given both, we investigate the applicability of eleven existing unary and binary AV methods as well as four generic unary classification algorithms on two self-compiled corpora. Furthermore, we highlight an important issue concerning the evaluation of AV methods based on fixed decision criterions, which has not been paid attention in previous AV studies.

Oren Halvani, Christian Winter, Lukas Graner

Compression models represent an interesting approach for different classification tasks and have been used widely across many research fields. We adapt compression models to the field of authorship verification (AV), a branch of digital text forensics. The task in AV is to verify if a questioned document and a reference document of a known author are written by the same person. We propose an intrinsic AV method, which yields competitive results compared to a number of current state-of-the-art approaches, based on support vector machines or neural networks. However, in contrast to these approaches our method does not make use of machine learning algorithms, natural language processing techniques, feature engineering, hyperparameter optimization or external documents (a common strategy to transform AV from a one-class to a multi-class classification problem). Instead, the only three key components of our method are a compressing algorithm, a dissimilarity measure and a threshold, needed to accept or reject the authorship of the questioned document. Due to its compactness, our method performs very fast and can be reimplemented with minimal effort. In addition, the method can handle complicated AV cases where both, the questioned and the reference document, are not related to each other in terms of topic or genre. We evaluated our approach against publicly available datasets, which were used in three international AV competitions. Furthermore, we constructed our own corpora, where we evaluated our method against state-of-the-art approaches and achieved, in both cases, promising results.