This evaluation probes a machine learning model's ability to accurately detect fraudulent financial transactions in highly imbalanced tabular data, while also measuring the system-level overhead and economic viability of integrating blockchain-based audit trails. It tests both detection accuracy on real-world and synthetic datasets and the practical throughput/latency constraints of on-chain verification workflows. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Kaggle Credit Card Fraud, Enterprise P...
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill fraud-detection-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Fraud Detection Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-fraud-detection-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: fraud-detection-eval
description: This evaluation probes a machine learning model's ability to accurately detect fraudulent financial transactions in highly imbalanced tabular data, while also measuring the system-level overhead and economic viability of integrating blockchain-based audit trails. It tests both detection accuracy on real-world and synthetic datasets and the practical throughput/latency constraints of on-chain verification workflows. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Kaggle Credit Card Fraud, Enterprise Payment Dataset, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1, PR-AUC.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2604.22096
bibtex_key: wang2026tamperproof
confidence: high
---
# fraud-detection-eval
> Who Audits the Auditor? Tamper-Proof Fraud Detection with Blockchain-Anchored Explainable ML — Wang (2026) (arXiv:2604.22096, 2026)
## What this evaluates
This evaluation probes a machine learning model's ability to accurately detect fraudulent financial transactions in highly imbalanced tabular data, while also measuring the system-level overhead and economic viability of integrating blockchain-based audit trails. It tests both detection accuracy on real-world and synthetic datasets and the practical throughput/latency constraints of on-chain verification workflows.
## Datasets
- **Kaggle Credit Card Fraud** — total 284807; splits: 5-fold stratified CV (-1)
- **Enterprise Payment Dataset** — total 10000; splits: 5-fold stratified CV (-1)
## Metrics
- `F1` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Harmonic mean of precision and recall: F1 = 2 * (Precision * Recall) / (Precision + Recall). Optimized for imbalanced fraud detection where false positives and false negatives carry significant operational costs.
- `PR-AUC` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Area under the Precision-Recall curve computed across all classification thresholds. Preferred over ROC-AUC for highly imbalanced datasets (0.17% fraud rate) as it focuses on the positive class performance.
- `Precision` — range: [0, 1]
- True Positives / (True Positives + False Positives). Measures the proportion of flagged transactions that are actually fraudulent.
- `Recall` — range: [0, 1]
- True Positives / (True Positives + False Negatives). Measures the proportion of actual frauds correctly identified by the model.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Tabular transaction features representing individual payment requests (e.g., amount, vendor history, approval timing, budget utilization).
**Output**: Binary fraud classification (or fraud probability score) and a SHAP explanation listing the top-5 contributing features for the prediction.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(y_true, y_pred_proba, threshold=0.5):
y_pred = (y_pred_proba >= threshold).astype(int)
tp = np.sum((y_pred == 1) & (y_true == 1))
fp = np.sum((y_pred == 1) & (y_true == 0))
fn = np.sum((y_pred == 0) & (y_true == 1))
prec = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) > 0 else 0.0
rec = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) > 0 else 0.0
f1 = 2 * prec * rec / (prec + rec) if (prec + rec) > 0 else 0.0
# PR-AUC computed across thresholds
precisions, recalls, _ = precision_recall_curve(y_true, y_pred_proba)
pr_auc = np.trapz(precisions, recalls)
return {'precision': prec, 'recall': rec, 'f1': f1, 'pr_auc': pr_auc}
```
## Common pitfalls
- PR-AUC is frequently confused with ROC-AUC; the paper explicitly uses PR-AUC due to the extreme class imbalance (0.17% fraud rate), making ROC-AUC misleadingly optimistic.
- Blockchain confirmation latency (3–5 seconds on Polygon PoS) is often overlooked as a system bottleneck, reducing end-to-end throughput to ~200 tx/min compared to ML-only batch throughput (45,000/sec).
- The synthetic Enterprise Payment Dataset lacks real-world enterprise features and is explicitly acknowledged as a limitation; results should not be generalized to production environments without external validation.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Table II presents detection results using 5-fold stratified cross-validation. Our LightGBM-based detector achieves the highest F1 (0.895) and PR-AUC (0.974).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{wang2026tamperproof,
title={Who Audits the Auditor? Tamper-Proof Fraud Detection with Blockchain-Anchored Explainable ML},
author={Wang (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2604.22096}
}
```
- arXiv: 2604.22096
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!