2022 International Conference on Recent Trends in Microelectronics, Automation, Computing and Communications Systems (ICMACC)
Composite User Behaviour Assisted Rumour
2022 International Conference on Recent Trends in Microelectronics, Automation, Computing and Communications Systems (ICMACC) | 978-1-6654-9604-9/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICMACC54824.2022.10093405
Detection over Online Social Media
Neelima Gurrapu
Department of Computer Science and Engineering National
Institute of Technology Nagaland Chumukedima, Dimapur
797 103, Nagaland e-mail: gneelima83@gmail.com
Abstract--Recently rumour spreading on Online Social
Media has become a serious problem which infects the
damages to society at both organization and individual
levels. Hence, the rumour detection has been emerged as
an active research which identifies the rumors
automatically. In the rumour detection system, the features
have a major role which describes the characteristics of
rumour related posts. In this paper, we propose a
composite user behaviour related features to describe the
characteristics of rumours. Under the composite user
concept, we referred the behaviors of both users such as
author and reader. Totally, we derive ten features from
both users’ behavior and fed to machine learning
algorithm to train the classifier. Here, two classifiers
namely Support Vector Machine and K-Nearest
Neighbour are used. For performance evaluation, a
standard benchmark dataset is considered and the
performance is assessed through precision, recall and F1-
score.
Keywords--Online Social Media, Rumours,
behaviour, author, readers, Classifier, Precision.
I. INTRODUCTION
Recently, the emergence of Online Social Media
(OSM) like Twitter, Facebook, SinaWeibo has become very
popular as they provide fast information acquisition and
dissemination. With the help of OSM, users can share the
information freely, particularly in the case of emergency
situations like Hurricanes, Floods, and Earthquakes [1].
OSM has grown rapidly and people treat them as an
important source of information sharing in the routine daily
life [2]. On the other hand, the OSM is reported as a
misusing media to propagate false news or rumours which
can shows major impact on financial markets, individual’s
reputation and disrupting oriented operations [3]. Actually,
the rumour propagation is one of the serious challenges
which were dealing from several years. In the ancient days,
the rumours are propagated by means of radio, newspapers
and mouth. But, recently, due to the emergence of OSM, the
rumour propagation has become a serioussocio-political
challenge as it propagates the rumours fast and wide. For
example, in the year of March 2011, three incidents namely
Earthquake, Tsunami and Nuclear crisis are occurred
sequentially. At that time a rumour was spread in the china
through SinaWeibo stating that an iodized salt can protect
the people from nuclear radiation. This made the people
flock to dispensaries, supermarkets and stores to purchase
the salt and thus the rate was raised by 5 to 10 times. Hence,
there is a need to detect the rumours by OSM thereby their
wide spreading can be controlled.
978-1-6654-9604-9/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on June 26,2023 at 04:47:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Nagaraju Baydeti
Department of Computer Science and Engineering National
Institute of Technology Nagaland Chumukedima, Dimapur
797 103, Nagaland e-mail:
baydetinagaraju@nitnagaland.ac.in
Generally, the rumour detection is treated as a
binary classification problem which classifies the input post
into two classes; they are rumour and non-rumour. The
classifier assumes that all the rumours follow similar
statistics [4], [5]. In case the data is following the similar
characteristics, then the classifier fails to identify the
rumour. Moreover, the earlier researchers demonstrated that
no single machine learning algorithm is capable to show an
overwhelming performance in all situations. It is also
demonstrated that the features of data has most vital role for
machine learning in the classification related issues [6].
Hence, the feature representation is an important step for the
detection of rumours. Several features are introduced by
past researchers [7], [8] for the rumours detection in OSM.
Accordingly, the all features are broadly classified into five
categories; they are Topic, Propagation, Multimedia, content
and User behavior based features. Most of the researchers
concentrated on the first four types of features and least
focusedon the user behavior based features even though they
have strong credibility towards rumours representation [9].
user’s M. Mendoza et al. [10] reported that rumour related posts
are questioned by more number of users than the normal
posts. So, the Number of questioned posts can be considered
as one of features of rumour. In such manner, several user
behaviors related features are introduced in the past but they
have limited performance because they can’t show insight
characteristic of users.
To sort out this problem and improve detection
performance, this paper proposes a new feature
representation method based on user’s behaviour. As the
user behaviour has more credibility with rumour related
posts, we considered them to represent the features of
rumour related posts. Under the use behaviour related
features, we consider the behaviour of both author and
reader. Here the author is regarded as the user who posted
the post while the reader is regarded as the user who
received the post. Combining these two behaviors, we
represent each post with totally ten features among which
seven are Authors related and three are reader related.
Finally, for classification, we employed two machine
learning algorithms namely the binary Support Vector
Machine (SVM) algorithm, K-Nearest Neighbour (K-NN)
Algorithm.
Rest of the paper is organized as follows; Section II
explores the details of literature survey related to rumour
detection. Section III explores the details of proposed
mechanism. Section IV explores the experimental
validations and section V concludes the paper.
II. LITERATURE SURVEY
G. Cai et al. [8]focused on the detection of rumours
in Chinese SinaWeibo OSM by considering the crowd
395
 responses as the features. In simple form, they are the texts
of retweets and can be called as reposting tweets. Further,
they also considered the comments under a particular social
event. Initially, they aimed at acquiring the theme data form
the official rumour-busting service provided by Weibo.
Next, they made clustering analysis to analyze the text
features extracted from comments and retweets and then
trained to classifier. Md. RashedIbnNawabet al. [11]
considered word embedding and sentiment score for the
detection of rumours. At the classification phase, they used
five machine learning algorithms namely Logistic
Regression, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Artificial
Neural Network (ANN), k-Nearest Neighbor and Random
Forest Algorithm.
Junjie Cen, Yongbo Li [12] proposed a rumour
detection methods based on deep learning in OSM. First,
they developed an API to fetch the rumour and non-rumour
related data from SinaWeibo. Next, they represented each
post with a feature called as Distributed Word Vector.
Finally, the based on the obtained features, two set of
features are computed; they are sematic features and
statistical features. Finally the features are fed to Multi
bidirectional long short-term memory (BiLSTM) model for
classification.
SushilaShelke, &Vahida Attar [13] used three
different set of post-wise features namely User, content and
lexical features to represent a rumor for the purpose of its
identification in Online Social Networks. Further, they
employed word embedding BiLSTM and Multilayer
Perceptron (MLP) for classification purpose. Simulation
experiments are carried out over the standard benchmark
Twitter dataset.
ZhiruiLuo et al. [14] proposed to fuse the two types
of features namely linguistic features and temporal
structural features for the improvisation of rumour detection
performance in Twitter. Further, they proposed a sequential
encoding mechanism to integrate the propagation tree into
the vector space and preserved the temporal structural
information of propagation tree. For the extraction of
linguistic features from short tweets, they applied two pre-
trained transformer based models namely Bidirectional
Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) [15]
and Robustly Optimized BERT Pre-training Approach
(RoBERTa) [16].
Motivated with necessity to develop a rumour
detection model, Kumar A et al. [17] proposed a hybrid
rumour classification model by combining deep learning
(Convolutional Neural Network) with Filter Wrapper
(Information gain-Ant Colony Optimization) optimized
Naïve Bayes Classifier. The textual features are trained
using the CNN and then combined with the Optimized
feature vector derived through IG-ACO. Aoshuang Ye et al.
[18] consider the temporal propagation features and content
features [19] to describe the rumour. They analyze the
propagation pattern by counting the statistics in each layer
of rumour propagation cycle. Then for feature extraction
and classification purpose, they applied both CNN and RNN
models.
G. Liang et al. [20] proposed to used five user
behavior based features to detect the rumours in Chinese
Micro blogs. They proposed some new features and
combined with few existing features and tested the model
through different machine learning algorithms including
decision tree, K-nearest neighbour and SVM. For
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on June 26,2023 at 04:47:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
396
experimental validation, they employed SinaWeibo data
from real world.
III. PROPOSED APPROACH
1. Overview
According to [6] the feature representation has a
lead role in the rumour detection. The performance of
rumour detection mechanism is heavily dependent on the
features adapted to represent the post. Basedon the analysis
of user’sbehaviour we considered totally 10 features. The
user behaviour related features include both author’s
behaviour as well as reader’sbehaviour. Since the reader’s
response is different for every post, we consider their
behaviour as a part of feature representation. After feature
representation they process for testing and we use SVMand
K-NN Algorithmsas classifiers.
2. Features extraction
Under the features extraction our method derives
two set of features; they are features from author’s
behaviour and features from Reader's behaviour. In general
the difference between patterns of normal authors
and rumours generating authors is much high. For instance,
only limited number of rumour generating authors uses the
authenticated account to post the rumours such that they can
escape the possible corresponding responsibilities
whilenormal authors useauthenticated accounts to enhance
their reputation. Consequently readers also responds
differently for rumour related posts and normal posts.
Hence this paper considered both author’s and reader’s
behaviour for feature extraction.
a. Features based on Author’s behaviour
Thefeatures of author’s behaviour refer the features
derived based on the behaviour of authors who post on
OSM. Under this category, we derived totally seven
features namely verified account, number of following,
number of Followees, average number of posts, average
number of statuses, user role and profile picture. The
details of all these features are explored here.
1. Verified account: this feature indicates the authenticity
of user and it is provided by service provider. Generally to
improve the reputation, users apply to OSM service provider
for their identity authentication. Upon the verification of
user identity the service provider issue a tag along with his /
her name. This tag is used by other users to judge the
authenticity of author.
2. Number of following: a follower is defined as a user who
follows particular author or a subscriber. The followers
receive posts from the author in their timeline whenever the
author posts on OSM. With the larger number of followers
the rumour reaches to more in number. Hence rumour
generating authors wait until their followers value reaches to
higher value thereby they can spread the rumour in a
widespread manner.
3. Number of followee is being followed (NF2): a followee
is defined as a user who is followed by some other users and
has a valid subscription. Unlike the Twitter and Weibo, the
Wechat and Facebook allows users to follow any user
without their permission. In general, for a person with
more followees will get more followers. Hence the rumour
 generating authors follow more people to attract other users
to follow them. So, for a rumour generating authors, the
NF2 is much larger in number than the normal authors. It is
calculated as follows
= (1)
4. Average post speed per day: it is referred to the number
of posts posted by an author on OSM per day. As the main
intention of rumour generating authors is to spread their
information, they post more number of posts per day
compared to normal users. Hence the value of average
number of posts per day of rumour generating authors is
much higher and it is calculated from their posts posted on
OSM in a day.
5. Number of possible online social media sources: it is
referred to the total number of users who post particular post
orits similar posts instead of forwarding it. Usually one
person or a small Number of persons initiates the rumour
posts on OSM, while the authentic or normal users
originates a lot number of posts which are not related to
each other. Hence the source of rumour initiation is only
one if it was initiated by single user or its size is not more
than a group size if it was initiated by a colluded users
group.
6. User role: User Role measures the ratio of followers to
the followees for a user. A user with larger value of
follower-to-followeeratio is regarded as an author while the
user with follower-to-followee ratio is regarded as a reader
or receiver. The values regarding number of followers and
followeescan be derived from the authors account.
7. Profile picture: it is also considered as one of the user
behaviour related feature. A user with larger number of
profile picture changes can be regarded as a rumour
generating author as the normal and calm authors won't
change their profile pictures rigorously. If a user is a
rumour generator he / she tries to change profile pic for
every new post and they chooses the pic in such a way it is
relevant to the post. If the author uses such kind of pictures,
then the readers will get attracted and spreads the rumour in
a wide manner.
b. Features based on reader’s behaviour
Under this subsection,we explore the details of
features related to the behaviour of readers which can also
be called as users. Under these features, we extract totally
three features namely number of comments and
reposts, number of questioned comments and number of
corrections. The details about all these three features are
explored here.
1. Number of comments and Reposts: almost the entire
OSM sites allow users to comment and repost a post which
they had seen or read on their timeline. Both the reposts and
comments are regarded as the behaviour of a reader which
can contribute towards the rumour detection. Number of
comments describes the total number of people expressed
their opinions on a post and the total number of reposts
describe that number of people Reposted a post. Generally
these factors can be used to know the popularity of a post.
A larger value of these features denotes that the post is
popular in OSM. Since the rumour posts also looks like
tempting and popular and describe the events of interest,
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on June 26,2023 at 04:47:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
397
most of the readers can do either a comment or repost.
Hence the total number of comments and repost for a
rumour post is much larger than a normal post.
2. Questioned comments ratio (QCR): the posts related to
rumours originate from unreliable sources. Hence they are
prone to be challenged in its determination process.
Mendoza et al. [10] discovered that the false information is
much more questioned than the information ended up with
the truth. Almost all OSM platforms are providing
commenting facility to their users such that they can express
their opinions of feelings freely to any post through
commenting service. According to Mendoza et al. a post
with larger number of questioned comments has a larger
probability to be a rumour. Hence we use the QCR to
signify the questioning behaviour of readers.
Mathematically the QC are is calculated as
| !|
= (2)
|" !|
Where the larger value of QCR shows that the post # is a
rumour and vice versa.
3. Number of corrections: in OSM, there exists so many
number of posts those tries to get corrected if they found as
disinformation and misinformation. According to Shirai et
al. [10], 14.7% individuals or organizations would follow a
rumour corrections strategy if they found that a post is
rumour. Absolutely the posts of rumours subjected to
rumour correction are larger in number compared to the
posts related to the normal posts. Hence the post with larger
number of correction is regarded as a rumour.
After the representation of each Post with the set of
ten features then we apply machine learning algorithms to
train classifier for the detection of rumours. Here we used
SVM and K-NN algorithms for the purpose of classification.
As it is a binary classifier it can perfectly classifies the
rumours and non-rumours much effectively.
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
In this section, we explain the details of
experimental results. Under this section initially, we explain
the details of datasets, then the results of our experiments.
1. Experimental Setup
For experimental validation, we used a standard
dataset called as Zubiaga dataset [22]. It is one of the
standard dataset and quite renowned in this field and have
been used in various studies. It can cover a wide range of
topics including politics, health and disaster etc. At first,
Zubiaga et al. employed a Twiter Streaming API to acquire
the tweets in two different environments; they are 1)
Particular rumours those are detected as a priori and 2)
breaking news those are likely to sparkle multiple rumours.
They collected the tweets from five events of breaking news
namely Charlie Hebdo, Ferguson, Germanwings Crash,
Ottawa Shooting and Sydney Seige. After the collection
larger volume of tweets, they only sampled the tweets those
were provoked with larger number of retweets. Then they
annotated the tweets manually as either rumour or non-
rumour. Totally, they collected 6425 tweets, among which
4023 are rumour related tweets and the remaining 2402 are
non-rumour related tweets.
 2. Results and Discussion
After the preparation of dataset, the next step is to During the testing, the posts are tested one by one and the
extract features in which every tweet is represented with performance metrics are measured from the confusion
totally ten set of features. Then the classifiersare trained one matrix as depicted above. Based on the TPs, FPs, FNs and
by one. To get the better results on the dataset, we employed TNs, the performance metrics are modeled and their
k-fold cross validation. For this purpose, the entire dataset is mathematical representation is done as follows;
partitioned into k groups of equal size and then perform k
separate learning experiments using k-1 groups for training ",
$%&'()(*+ = (3)
and the one remaining group for testing. At last, the average ",- ,
of all the five folds isconsidered as final performance. Here, ",
k is taken as 5 to explore the sensitivity of proposed method &'.// = (4)
",-
to the size of dataset.For performance assessment, we used
three metrics namely precision, recall and F1-score. Recall ∗, 4 ∗5 4
1 − 2'*%& = (5)
reveals the fraction of relevant documents those are , 4 -5 4
retrieved and precision reveals the fraction of correctly
retrieved documents those are relevant. F1-score is the Here TP is considered when the post related to rumour is
Harmonic mean of recall and precision. These metrics are detected as Rumour, FN is considered when the Rumor is
measured based on the confusion matrix, as shown in detected as non-rumour, FP is considered when the Non-
Table.1. rumour is detected a rumour and finally TN is considered
when the non-rumour is detected as non-rumour. At every
Table.1 Sample Confusion Matrix validation, the performance is measured and they are
Predicted explored in the following Table.2. The results shown in
Table.2 are belongs to the simulation study with full set of
Rumour Non-Rumour
features and two machine learning algorithms such as K-NN
Rumour True Positive False Negative and SVM.
Original (TP) (FN)
Non-Rumour False Positive True Negative
(FP) (TN)

Table.2 Performance at fivefold cross validation for different classifiers

Fold k-NN SVM

Recall Precision F1-Score Recall Precision F1-Score
Fold 1 52.3362 70.2145 59.9713 61.8254 65.2355 63.4847
Fold 2 45.8471 65.6632 53.9944 65.9674 69.8858 67.8701
Fold 3 55.4896 66.4712 60.4860 73.7845 72.5855 73.1801
Fold 4 47.3648 67.5385 55.6807 67.8888 67.3382 67.6124
Fold 5 60.2235 70.6375 65.0161 66.9930 69.2300 68.0931

Fig.1, Fig.2 and Fig.3 shows the performance of

the proposed mechanism through three performance metrics
75 namely precision, recall and F1-score respectively. For this
K-NN simulation, the entire features are partitioned into three sets
70
SVM
namely full features, author features and reader features. In
65 the first set, we considered total features (Author and
60 Reader), while the remaining two sets considered the author
and reader features individually. For all the three cases, we
Precision(%)

55
applied two machine learning algorithms and hence the total
50 simulation studies are six. At every simulation study, we
measured the performance through precision, recall and F1-
45
score.
40
Fig.1 describes the precision details at different
35
features and at different classifiers. From the Fig.1, we can
30 see that the maximum precision is obtained at full set of
features while the minimum precision is observed at the
25
reader features. Since the reader’s behavior has less
20 significance in the representation of a rumour post, it had
Full Features Reader Features Author Features
shown least precision. Compared to the reader’s behavior,
User Behaviour Features
the author’s behaviour has more importance and thus it has
gained greater precision. On the other side, the SVM has
Fig.1 Precision analysis at different features and classifiers

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on June 26,2023 at 04:47:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
398
 gained better precision at full set of features and Author performance by achieving a recall rate of 59.7720% which
features while K-NN gained better performance at reader’s is approximately 10% boost up from author features. Next,
features. The average, precision at full set of features is Fig.3 describes the performance of proposed approach in
observed as 68.1050% while for readers and authors terms of F1-score. As the F1-score is the harmonic means of
features, it is observed as 48.3887% and 57.9928% precision and recall, it ensures a perfect detection
respectively. performance. From Fig.3, the average F1-score at full set of
features is observed as 63.5389% while for readers and
70
K-NN
authors features, it is observed as 38.6673% and 53.7621%
65 SVM respectively.
60 V. CONCLUSION
55 Recently, the Online Social Media has become an
easy and flexiblesource for information sharing. Moreover,
Recall(%)

50
it provides a free access to the users to share their opinions
45 and feelings regarding several real world events. Though it
40
has several benefits to society, its misutilizaion is being
encouraged by posting false news or rumours which causes
35 a serious damage to the society. Hence, the rumour
30
detection is required which can identify a post either it
belongs to a rumour or non-rumour. Towards such intention,
25 this paper proposed composite feature set based rumour
detection strategy assisted with machine learning
20
Full Features Reader Features Author Features algorithms. Mainly, this approach considered the features
User Behaviour Features related to user’s behavior and analyzed both author and
reader’s behavior. With the help of user’s behavior, each
Fig. 2 Recall analysis at different features and classifiers post is represented with ten features and processed through
70
machine learning algorithms for classification. Two
K-NN machine learning algorithm’s namely SVM and K-NN are
65 SVM used to train and test the data. For experimental validation,
60 we referred a standard ZubiagaDataset and the performance
is measured through precision, recall and F1-score. The
55
average precision at for K-NN algorithm with full feature
F1-Score(%)

50 set is observed as 68.55235% and for SVM with full feature

45
40
35
30
25
20
Full Features Reader Features
User Behaviour Features
Fig. 3 F1-Score analysis at different features and classifiers
Fig.2 describes the performance of proposed
approach in terms of recall at different features
representations with different classifiers. From the Fig.2, it
can be observed that the maximum recall is observed at Full
set of features with SVM classifier. As SVM is a binary
classifier, it can correctly retrieves the relevant posts relate
to rumour as well as non-rumour. Compared to the reader’s
and Author’s features, the second set has gained maximum
recall than the first set. Since the author behaviour reflect
his/he rumourogeneous nature, their inclusion boosts up the
performance. Even though the reader’s behavior is different
for rumour and non-rumour related posts, they contribute
less towards the detection of correct posts. Hence, the
average recall of reader features is observed as 34.8825%
while the recall observed with author’s features is
48.4492%. From these results, it can be observe that they
had shown a limited performance as it was no reached even
50%. But, the combined features set boosted up the
set, it is observed as 68.6741%. Next, the average recall for
K-NN algorithm with full feature set is observed as
52.6632% and for SVMwith full feature set, it is observed as
67.5589%. Finally, the Average F-score is observed as
59.5666% for K-NN with full feature set while it is
observed as 68.2058%. Based on these results, we can say
that the SVM had better applicability in rumor detection as
it is a binary classifier and classifies the two classes (rumour
Author Features
and non-rumour) effectively.
In this paper, we referred only user features for
rumour text representation. As a future direction, it can be
extended to the use of several features namely lexical,
statistical features etc. Moreover, we considered only text
data for rumour identification. However, the recent rumour
spread is happening through multimedia (image, speech and
videos). Hence, as a future direction, multimedia data can
also be considered as the input objects of rumour and can be
used for identification. For images and videos, the advanced
learning techniques including Convolutional Neural
Networks (CNN) and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN)
show a rich detection performance as they deeply analyses
the data.
References
[1] O’Connor R., Facebook and Twitter are Reshaping Journalism as We
Know It, https://www.alternet.org/story/121211/, January 19th 2009.
[2] A. Friggeri, L. A. Adamic, D. Eckles, and J. Cheng, “Rumor cascades,”
in Proc. 8th Int. AAAI Conf. Weblogs Social Media, 2014, pp. 101–110
[3] S. Vosoughi, D. Roy, and S. Aral, “The spread of true and false news
online.,” Science, vol. 359, no. 6380, pp. 1146–1151, Mar. 2018.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on June 26,2023 at 04:47:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
399
 [4] F. Chierichetti, S. Lattanzi, and A. Panconesi, “Rumor spreading in
socialnetworks,” in Automata, Languages and Programming, New York,
NY,USA: Springer, 2009, pp. 375–386.
[5] L. Hang, “Overview of statistical learning methods” in The Study
Methodof Statics. Beijing, China: Tsinghua Express, 2012, pp. 7–24.
[6] M. A. Hall, “Correlation-based feature selection for machine
learning,”Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Comput. Sci., The University of
Waikato,Hamilton, New Zealand, 1999.
[7] S. Sun, H. Liu, J. He, and X. Du, “Detecting event rumors on
SinaWeibo automatically,” in Web Technologies and Applications, New
York, NY, USA: Springer, 2013, pp. 120–131.
[8] G. Cai, H. Wu, and R. Lv, “Rumors detection in Chinese via crowd
responses,” in Proc. IEEE/ACM Int. Conf. Adv. Social Netw. Anal. Min.
(ASONAM’14), 2014, pp. 912–917.
[9] T. Takahashi and N. Igata, “Rumor detection on twitter,” in Proc. Joint
6th Int. Conf. Soft Comput.Intell.Syst. (SCIS); 13th Int. Symp. Adv. Intell.
Syst. (ISIS), 2012, pp. 452–457.
[10] M. Mendoza, B. Poblete, and C. Castillo, “Twitter under crisis: Can
we trust what we RT?,” in Proc. 1st Workshop Social Media Anal.
(SOMA’10), 2010, pp. 71–79.
[11] Md. RashedIbnNawab, Kazi Md. Shahiduzzaman, TityaEng, and Md
Noor Jamal, “Rumor Detection in Social Media with User Information
Protection”, European Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer
ScienceVol. 4, No. 4, July 2020.
[12] Junjie Cen, Yongbo Li, “A Rumor Detection Method from Social
Network Based on Deep Learning in Big Data Environment”,
Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, Vol.2022, Article ID
1354233, 8 pages, 2022.
[13] SushilaShelke, &Vahida Attar, “Rumor detection in social network
based on user, content and lexical features”, Multimedia Tools and
Applications (2022) 81:17347–17368.
[14] ZhiruiLuo ,Qingqing Li , and Jun Zheng, “Deep Feature Fusion for
Rumor Detection on Twitter”, IEEE Access, Vol.9, 2021, pp:126065-
126074.
[15] J. Devlin, M. W. Chang, K. Lee, and K. Toutanova, ``BERT: Pre-
training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding,'' in
Proc. Conf. North Amer. Chapter Assoc. Comput. Linguistics, Hum. Lang.
Technol., 2019, pp. 4171_4186.
[16] Y. Liu, M. Ott, N. Goyal, J. Du, M. Joshi, D. Chen, O. Levy, M.
Lewis, L. Zettlemoyer, and V. Stoyanov, ``RoBERTa: A robustly
optimized BERT pretraining approach,'' 2019, arXiv:1907.11692.
[17] Kumar, A., Bhatia, M.P.S., and Sangwan, S.R., “Rumour Detection
Using Deep learning and Filter wrapper feature selection in Benchmark
twitter dataset”, Multimed Tools Appl, August 2021.
[18] Aoshuang Ye, Lina Wang, Run Wang, Wenqi Wang, JianpengKe, and
Danlei Wang, “An End-to-End Rumour detection model based on Feature
aggregation”, Complexity, Vol.2021, Article ID 6659430, 16 pages, 2021.
[19] M. Alizadeh, J. N. Shapiro, C. Buntain, and J. A. Tucker, “Content-
based features predict social media influence operations,” Science
Advances, vol. 6, Article ID eabb5824, 2020.
[20] G. Liang, W. He, C. Xu, L. Chen, and J. Zeng, “Rumor identification
in micro-blogging systems based on users’ behavior,” IEEE Transactions
on Computational Social Systems, vol. 2, pp. 99–108, 2015.
[21] T. Shiraiet al., “Estimation of false rumor diffusion modeland
estimation of prevention model of false rumor diffusion on twitter (in
japanese), in 26th Annu. Conf. Jpn. Soc. Artif.Intell., 2012, vol. 26, pp. 1–4.
[22] A. Zubiaga, M. Liakata, and R. Procter, “Learning reporting dynamics
during breaking news for rumour detection in social media,” Oct. 2016,
arXiv:1610.07363. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.07363

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WARANGAL. Downloaded on June 26,2023 at 04:47:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
400