Researchers Have Found a Way To Root Out Identity Thieves By Analyzing Their Mouse Movements With AI (qz.com)

An anonymous reader shares an article: In the study, published recently in PLoS One, the researchers quizzed 40 respondents about their personal details. Half of the respondents were asked to answer the questions truthfully, but the other half were given details about fake identities they had to memorize and use in the quiz. The computer quiz kept track of the movement of each respondent's mouse as they answered the questions, and noted how the fakes differed from the truth-tellers when they moved the cursor from the bottom of the screen to the answers at the top. The quiz consisted of 12 questions like, "Do you live in Padua?" and "Are you Italian?" That covered details an identity thief could easily remember and answer, but then the quiz threw them a curve ball. "What is your zodiac sign," it asked in the second series of 12 questions, which were designed to be easy for the genuine respondents, but more difficult for the fakers to work out. After the researchers took the mouse-movement data collected from the quizzes and trained a machine-learning algorithm to analyze it, they found that was indeed the case. It was able to discern the fake responses from the real ones 95% of the time.

Comments

zodiac signs

[Anonymous Coward]

I have no fucking clue what my zodiac sign is, I'd have to look that crap up. I'm not just not into fairy tales for adults.

Re:zodiac signs

[gnick]

I have no fucking clue what my zodiac sign is, I'd have to look that crap up. I'm not just not into fairy tales for adults.

My guess is that makes you part of the minority. I, like I'd imagine most people, know my sign but don't particularly care. I have no idea what it "says about me" and put zero faith in sign-specific predictions. I know what Chinese-animal-year I was born in too, but put the same amount of faith in what it implies.

Just because you don't believe in Hansel & Gretel doesn't mean you've never heard of it. You've really never run into an astrological chart?

Re:zodiac signs

[PopeRatzo]

I have no fucking clue what my zodiac sign is, I'd have to look that crap up. I'm not just not into fairy tales for adults.

Then you're clearly a Sagittarius.

Re:zodiac signs

[PopeRatzo]

Can you name one of the books from the Bible?

Well, you've got your Fellowship, Two Towers and then Return of the King.

What do I get?

Re:zodiac signs

[jblues]

This Just In: Data Scientists develop a machine-learning algorithm that can identify, with 95.6% accuracy, people who fake not knowing their Zodiac sign, based on how vitriolic their slashdot comments are.

Respondents were shown an article on slashdot regarding a supervised AI application, and encouraged to comment. The forum then threw them a curve-ball, encouraging them to disclose their star signs. The results were then analyzed by a machine learning algorithm.

Johan Virgo, when asked about the research project said: "It sounds simple, but given that 99.9% of all Slashdot comments are belligerent and asinine, the challenge was to identify the subtle signature within a war-mongering comment that implied faking knowledge of one's Zodiac sign. This is something a machine can do much better than us." Johan added that they were stunned to learn that their system also worked on trolls.

Re:zodiac signs

[Gavagai80]

I know what Chinese-animal-year I was born in too, but put the same amount of faith in what it implies.

This actually points out how culturally-specific the question is. I have no idea what my Chinese animal year is, but the Chinese version of this would no doubt ask me. Immigrants are going to be automatically labeled as identity thieves by this algorithm because they don't share the same cultural context.

What is my sign?

[Archangel Michael]

I respond .... "Neon".

"Researcher" ?

[x0ra]

Are they even trying anymore ? It sounds more and more that the way to research work is 1) gather shit data, 2) feed any combination to it to neural net, 3) look for correlation, 4) repeat if nothing interesting, 5) publish. At this point, they might as well rename AI for AR, as in Artificial Research...

Re:"Researcher" ?

[dunkindave]

Actually, that is close to how a lot of drug research is done. 1) Create new drug, 2) throw at a lot of cultures to see what effect it has on any of them, 3) follow up where an effect is observed, 4) market. For example, Rogaine was originally developed to treat ulcers and hypertension, and Viagra to treat hypertension and mild heart problems, and look where they went.

Claims are overblown

[maiden_taiwan]

By itself, this study just shows that a machine learning algorithm can compute a statistical average (regarding mouse movements) that classifies a specific set of 40 people into two groups.

If the same statistical average also classifies other groups of people accurately, then you can make real claims about separating truth-tellers and liars.

See this good explanation of pattern classification and its uses and misuses.

Re:Also works for signature pads

[bluefoxlucid]

Why would there be a test for pedophilia? Is that for use in a clinical setting? I know some issues are ... tricky for people to deal with. Self-denial and all. I'm not 100% certain how detection is helpful, though, considering a person who is aware of some issue and willing to accept the potential shouldn't have trouble introspecting and identifying that they maybe are kind-of bisexual or whatever it is they're choking on.

I'd imagine test for pedophilia would be ... problematic in other situations. Huge invasion of privacy, at least here in the U.S.. We can't take legal action against someone who hasn't taken actual criminal action (no thought-crime), and discrimination against a person for such a diagnostic result would be devastating. We have legal protections for discrimination and privacy invasion if you're gay or something.