Table 8 Performance comparison of HMOA-GNN and existing CCFD methods on IEEE-CIS Fraud Detection dataset.
Ref | Algorithm | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1-score | AUC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zou et al.49 | DAE | 0.9030 | 0.2091 | 0.6970 | 0.3217 | 0.8957 |
Pang et al.50 | DevNet | 0.7398 | 0.0471 | 0.5976 | 0.0873 | 0.6739 |
Ileberi et al.51 | GA-RF | 0.9872 | 0.9863 | 0.5620 | 0.7160 | 0.9613 |
Ni et al.27 | SOBT | 0.9787 | 0.8819 | 0.4442 | 0.5908 | 0.7223 |
Xiang et al.52 | GTAN | 0.9700 | 0.7019 | 0.7172 | 0.7092 | 0.8762 |
Chang et al.53 | TFD | 0.9027 | 0.2318 | 0.8300 | 0.3624 | 0.9409 |
Ours | HMOA-GNN | 0.9805 | 0.6627 | 0.8333 | 0.7383 | 0.9445 |