[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
research-article

Detecting multiple seller collusive shill bidding

Published: 01 July 2021 Publication History

Highlights

This is the first paper to examine the scenario of multiple colluding sellers engaging in shill bidding.
We outline the optimal strategy to engage in to mask shill bidding behaviour.
We propose the first algorithm to provide evidence of whether groups of sellers are colluding.
Performance is demonstrated using simulated and commercial auction data.

Abstract

Shill bidding occurs when fake bids are introduced into an auction on the seller’s behalf in to artificially inflate the final price. The seller either has associates bid in the seller’s auctions, or the seller controls multiple fake bidder accounts that are used for shill bidding. We proposed a reputation system referred to as the Shill Score that indicates how likely a bidder is to be engaging in price inflating behaviour in a specific seller’s auctions. A potential bidder can observe the other bidders’ Shill Scores, and if they are high, the bidder can elect not to participate as there is some evidence that shill bidding occurs in the seller’s auctions. However, if a seller is in collusion with other sellers, or controls multiple seller accounts, the seller can spread the risk between the various sellers and can reduce suspicion on the shill bidder. Collusive seller behaviour impacts one of the characteristics of shill bidding the Shill Score examines; consequently, collusive behaviour can reduce a bidder’s Shill Score. This paper extends the Shill Score to detect shill bidding where multiple sellers are working in collusion with each other. We propose the first algorithm to provide evidence of whether groups of sellers are colluding. Based on how tight the association is between the sellers and the level of apparent shill bidding that is occurring in the auctions, a suspect bidder’s Shill Score is adjusted appropriately to remove any advantage from seller collusion. Performance is demonstrated using simulated and commercial auction data and extensive experimental results are presented.

References

[1]
ACCC, 2021. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, eBay & Online Auctions, www.accc.gov.au/consumers/online-shopping/ebay-online-auctions.
[3]
S. Barbaro, B. Bracht, Shilling, Squeezing, Sniping: Explaining late bidding in online second-price auctions, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany, Working article, 2004.
[4]
Y. Cheng, H. Xu, A Formal Approach to Detecting Shilling Behaviours in Concurrent Online Auctions, In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, 2006.
[5]
K.M. Dolan, S. Agent, Internet auction fraud: the silent victims, J. Econ. Crime Manage. 2 (1) (2004) 1–22.
[6]
Dong, F., Shatz, S.M., Xu, H., 2009. Inference of Online Auction Shills using Dempster-Shafer Theory. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Technology. New Generations, Las Vegas, USA, pp. 908–914.
[8]
eCommerce Bytes, 2021. eBay Makes Shill Bidding Easier to Detect, https://www.ecommercebytes.com/C/abblog/blog.pl?/pl/2007/8/1188006091.html.
[9]
Goel, A., Xu, H., & Shatz, S. M., 2010. A Multi-State Bayesian Network for Shill Verification in Online Auctions. In SEKE (pp. 279-285).
[10]
D.G. Gregg, J.E. Scott, A typology of complaints about eBay sellers, Commun. ACM 51 (4) (2008) 69–74.
[11]
Jank, W., & Shmueli, G., 2007. Studying Heterogeneity of Price Evolution in eBay Auctions via Functional Clustering. Handbook of Information Systems Series: Business Computing, Elsevier.
[12]
Kauffman, R. J., & Wood, C. A., 2003. Running up the bid: detecting, predicting, and preventing reserve price shilling in online auctions. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Electronic Commerce, 259-265.
[13]
R.J. Kauffman, C.A. Wood, The effects of shilling on final bid prices in online auctions, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 4 (1) (2005) 21–34.
[14]
D. Kaur, D. Garg, Variable bid fee: An online auction shill bidding prevention methodology, IEEE, 2015, pp. 381–386.
[15]
S.-J. Lin, Y.-Y. Jheng, C.-H. Yu, Combining ranking concept and social network analysis to detect collusive groups in online auctions, Expert Syst. Appl. 39 (10) (2012) 9079–9086.
[16]
N. Majadi, J. Trevathan, H. Gray, V. Estivill-Castro, N. Bergmann, Realtime detection of shill bidding in online auctions: a literature review, J. Comput. Sci. Rev. 25 (2017) 1–18.
[17]
N. Majadi, J. Trevathan, H. Gray, A run-time algorithm for detecting shill bidding in online auctions, J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Comm. Res. 13 (3) (2018) 17–49.
[18]
N. Majadi, J. Trevathan, A real-time detection algorithm for identifying shill bidders in multiple online auctions, IEEE Press, USA, 2018, pp. 3831–3840.
[19]
A. Nikitkov, D. Bay, Shill bidding: empirical evidence of its effectiveness and likelihood of detection in online auction systems, Int. J. Account. Inform. Syst. 16 (2015) 42–54.
[20]
Schwartz, J., & Dobrzynski, J., 2002. 3 men are charged with fraud in 1,100 art auctions on eBay, in The New York Times.
[21]
Sharova, 2021. Sharova Law Firm, Shill Bidding on eBay is Illegal 2019 Quick Guide, https://www.sharovalaw.com/news/shill-bidding-ebay.
[22]
J.M. Snyder, Online auction fraud: are the auction houses doing all they should or could stop online fraud, Fed. Comm. LJ 52 (1999) 453.
[24]
Trevathan, J., & Read, W., 2005 – Revised 2009. Detecting Shill Bidding in Online English Auctions, Handbook of Research on Social and Organizational Liabilities in Information Security. 446-470.
[25]
Trevathan, J., & Read, W., 2006. RAS: a system for supporting research in online auctions, ACM XRDS: Crossroads 12(4), 23-30.
[26]
J. Trevathan, W. Read, Investigating shill bidding behaviour involving colluding bidders, J. Comput. 2 (10) (2007) 63–75.
[27]
Trevathan J. & Read, W., 2007b. Detecting Collusive Shill Bidding, In the Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Information Technology - New Generations, 799-808.
[28]
Trevathan J., 2018. Getting into the Mind of an “In-Auction” Fraud Perpetrator, Computer Science Review, 27, 1-15.
[29]
S. Tsang, Y.S. Koh, G. Dobbie, S. Alam, Detecting online auction shilling frauds using supervised learning, Expert Syst. Appl. 41 (6) (2014) 3027–3040.
[30]
Wang, W., Hidvegi, Z., & Whinston, A., 2002. Shill Bidding in Multi-round Online Auctions, In Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
[31]
Williams C., 2015. eBay Shill Bidder gets £5,000 Fine. The Register. Website: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/05/ebay_shill/. Last accessed: April 2, 2015.
[32]
H. Xu, Y.T. Cheng, Model checking bidding behaviors in Internet concurrent auctions, Int. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. Eng. 22 (4) (2007) 179–191.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Online hybrid Dutch auction approach for selling toxic assets under asymmetric bidders and the possibility of collusionElectronic Commerce Research and Applications10.1016/j.elerap.2022.10114253:COnline publication date: 1-May-2022

Index Terms

  1. Detecting multiple seller collusive shill bidding
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Electronic Commerce Research and Applications
      Electronic Commerce Research and Applications  Volume 48, Issue C
      Jul 2021
      229 pages

      Publisher

      Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

      Netherlands

      Publication History

      Published: 01 July 2021

      Author Tags

      1. Shill bidding
      2. Online auction fraud
      3. Collusion
      4. Auction simulation
      5. Seller cliques

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 21 Dec 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2022)Online hybrid Dutch auction approach for selling toxic assets under asymmetric bidders and the possibility of collusionElectronic Commerce Research and Applications10.1016/j.elerap.2022.10114253:COnline publication date: 1-May-2022

      View Options

      View options

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media