IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v50y2020i1p64-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Microsoft Uses Machine Learning and Optimization to Reduce E-Commerce Fraud

Author

Listed:
  • Jay Nanduri

    (Dynamics 365 Fraud Protection, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington 98052)

  • Yuting Jia

    (Dynamics 365 Fraud Protection, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington 98052)

  • Anand Oka

    (Dynamics 365 Fraud Protection, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington 98052)

  • John Beaver

    (Dynamics 365 Fraud Protection, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington 98052)

  • Yung-Wen Liu

    (Dynamics 365 Fraud Protection, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington 98052)

Abstract

Many merchants conduct their businesses through e-commerce. One major challenge in tackling e-commerce fraud results from dynamic fraud patterns , which can degrade the detection power of risk models and can lead to them failing to detect fraud that has emerging unrecognized patterns. The problem is further exacerbated by the conventional decision frameworks that ignore the follow-up decisions made by other associated parties (e.g., payment-instrument-issuing banks and manual review agents). Microsoft developed a new fraud-management system (FMS) that effectively tackles these two challenges. It keeps features used by the machine learning (ML) risk models up to date by using real-time archiving, dynamic risk tables, and knowledge graphs. The FMS uses customized long-term and short-term sequential ML models to detect both historical and emerging fraud patterns. It also makes rapid real-time optimal decisions using a dynamic programming approach to optimize the long-term profit by taking into account the aforementioned multiple-party decisions. After implementing these innovations over a two-year period (2016–2018), Microsoft reduced its fraud loss by 0.52%, thus generating $75 million in additional savings; reduced the incorrect fraud rejection rate by 1.38%; and improved its bank authorization rate by 7.7 percentage points. The result was many millions of dollars in additional revenue. These innovations simultaneously prevent fraud and increase bank acceptance. In April 2019, Microsoft launched Microsoft Dynamics 365 Fraud Protection , a cloud-based service available for all e-commerce merchants.

Suggested Citation

  • Jay Nanduri & Yuting Jia & Anand Oka & John Beaver & Yung-Wen Liu, 2020. "Microsoft Uses Machine Learning and Optimization to Reduce E-Commerce Fraud," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 50(1), pages 64-79, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:50:y:2020:i:1:p:64-79
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.2019.1017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.2019.1017
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.2019.1017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cowan, Robin & Jonard, Nicolas, 2004. "Network structure and the diffusion of knowledge," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 1557-1575, June.
    2. Richard D. Smallwood & Edward J. Sondik, 1973. "The Optimal Control of Partially Observable Markov Processes over a Finite Horizon," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1071-1088, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Höppner, Sebastiaan & Baesens, Bart & Verbeke, Wouter & Verdonck, Tim, 2022. "Instance-dependent cost-sensitive learning for detecting transfer fraud," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 291-300.
    2. David J. Scheaf & Matthew S. Wood, 2022. "Entrepreneurial Fraud: A Multidisciplinary Review and Synthesized Framework," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(3), pages 607-642, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Turgay Ayer & Oguzhan Alagoz & Natasha K. Stout, 2012. "OR Forum---A POMDP Approach to Personalize Mammography Screening Decisions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1019-1034, October.
    2. Stephen Chen, 2009. "Corporate Responsibilities in Internet-Enabled Social Networks," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 523-536, December.
    3. Josef Daňa & Francesco Caputo & Jaroslav Ráček, 2020. "Complex Network Analysis for Knowledge Management and Organizational Intelligence," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(2), pages 405-424, June.
    4. Raffaele Paci & Emanuela Marrocu & Stefano Usai, 2014. "The Complementary Effects of Proximity Dimensions on Knowledge Spillovers," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 9-30, March.
    5. Holger Graf, 2013. "Inventor Networks in Emerging Key Technologies: Information Technology vs. Semiconductors," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Guido Buenstorf & Uwe Cantner & Horst Hanusch & Michael Hutter & Hans-Walter Lorenz & Fritz Rahmeyer (ed.), The Two Sides of Innovation, edition 127, pages 55-76, Springer.
    6. Anil K. Gupta & Paul E. Tesluk & M. Susan Taylor, 2007. "Innovation At and Across Multiple Levels of Analysis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 885-897, December.
    7. Gong, Linguo & Tang, Kwei, 1997. "Monitoring machine operations using on-line sensors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 479-492, February.
    8. Givon, Moshe & Grosfeld-Nir, Abraham, 2008. "Using partially observed Markov processes to select optimal termination time of TV shows," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 477-485, June.
    9. Elisa Giuliani, 2010. "Clusters, Networks and Economic Development: An Evolutionary Economics Perspective," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 12, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Makis, Viliam, 2009. "Multivariate Bayesian process control for a finite production run," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(3), pages 795-806, May.
    11. Li, Ziran & Sun, Jiajing & Wang, Shouyang, 2013. "Amplitude-Duration-Persistence Trade-off Relationship for Long Term Bear Stock Markets," MPRA Paper 54177, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Daniele Cassese & Paolo Pin, 2018. "Decentralized Pure Exchange Processes on Networks," Papers 1803.08836, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
    13. Liming Zhao & Haihong Zhang & Wenqing Wu, 2019. "Cooperative knowledge creation in an uncertain network environment based on a dynamic knowledge supernetwork," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 657-685, May.
    14. L M Maillart & T G Yeung & Z Gozde Icten, 2011. "Selecting test sensitivity and specificity parameters to optimally maintain a degrading system," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 225(2), pages 131-139, June.
    15. Rosina Moreno & Ernest Miguélez, 2012. "A Relational Approach To The Geography Of Innovation: A Typology Of Regions," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 492-516, July.
    16. Michael P. Schlaile & Johannes Zeman & Matthias Mueller, 2021. "It’s a Match! Simulating Compatibility-based Learning in a Network of Networks," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Michael P. Schlaile (ed.), Memetics and Evolutionary Economics, chapter 0, pages 99-140, Springer.
    17. Mueller, Matthias & Bogner, Kristina & Buchmann, Tobias & Kudic, Muhamed, 2015. "Simulating knowledge diffusion in four structurally distinct networks: An agent-based simulation model," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 05-2015, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    18. Nan Zhang & Sen Tian & Le Li & Zhongbin Wang & Jun Zhang, 2023. "Maintenance analysis of a partial observable K-out-of-N system with load sharing units," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 237(4), pages 703-713, August.
    19. Williams, Byron K., 2009. "Markov decision processes in natural resources management: Observability and uncertainty," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(6), pages 830-840.
    20. Mauro Napoletano & Stefano Battiston & Michael König & Frank Schweitzer, 2008. "The efficiency and evolution of R&D Networks," Sciences Po publications 2008-31, Sciences Po.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:50:y:2020:i:1:p:64-79. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.