Lucas Potin

Lucas Potin, Rosa Figueiredo, Vincent Labatut et al.

In the context of public procurement, several indicators called red flags are used to estimate fraud risk. They are computed according to certain contract attributes and are therefore dependent on the proper filling of the contract and award notices. However, these attributes are very often missing in practice, which prohibits red flags computation. Traditional fraud detection approaches focus on tabular data only, considering each contract separately, and are therefore very sensitive to this issue. In this work, we adopt a graph-based method allowing leveraging relations between contracts, to compensate for the missing attributes. We propose PANG (Pattern-Based Anomaly Detection in Graphs), a general supervised framework relying on pattern extraction to detect anomalous graphs in a collection of attributed graphs. Notably, it is able to identify induced subgraphs, a type of pattern widely overlooked in the literature. When benchmarked on standard datasets, its predictive performance is on par with state-of-the-art methods, with the additional advantage of being explainable. These experiments also reveal that induced patterns are more discriminative on certain datasets. When applying PANG to public procurement data, the prediction is superior to other methods, and it identifies subgraph patterns that are characteristic of fraud-prone situations, thereby making it possible to better understand fraudulent behavior.

Lucas Potin, Rosa Figueiredo, Vincent Labatut et al.

Graph classification aims to categorize graphs based on their structural and attribute features, with applications in diverse fields such as social network analysis and bioinformatics. Among the methods proposed to solve this task, those relying on patterns (i.e. subgraphs) provide good explainability, as the patterns used for classification can be directly interpreted. To identify meaningful patterns, a standard approach is to use a quality measure, i.e. a function that evaluates the discriminative power of each pattern. However, the literature provides tens of such measures, making it difficult to select the most appropriate for a given application. Only a handful of surveys try to provide some insight by comparing these measures, and none of them specifically focuses on graphs. This typically results in the systematic use of the most widespread measures, without thorough evaluation. To address this issue, we present a comparative analysis of 38 quality measures from the literature. We characterize them theoretically, based on four mathematical properties. We leverage publicly available datasets to constitute a benchmark, and propose a method to elaborate a gold standard ranking of the patterns. We exploit these resources to perform an empirical comparison of the measures, both in terms of pattern ranking and classification performance. Moreover, we propose a clustering-based preprocessing step, which groups patterns appearing in the same graphs to enhance classification performance. Our experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of this step, reducing the number of patterns to be processed while achieving comparable performance. Additionally, we show that some popular measures widely used in the literature are not associated with the best results.