Improving spam detection techniques using machine learning algorithms

Authors

Keywords:

XGBoost, F1-score., Spam detection, Machine learning, Model optimation

Abstract

Spam detection has become a critical challenge in maintaining the integrity and security of digital communication systems. This study focuses on enhancing spam detection precision by applying the XGBoost algorithm, compared to other machine learning models such as Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Random Forests. Traditional rule-based methods, while straightforward, need to address the increasing sophistication of spam tactics, leading to high rates of false positives and negatives. Machine learning, with its data-driven adaptability, provides a powerful alternative for improving spam detection accuracy. This research evaluates the effectiveness of XGBoost in handling large and complex datasets, leveraging its ability to build robust predictive models by combining weak learners. Performance metrics, including accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score, are used to assess its efficacy. Additionally, a comparative analysis highlights XGBoost's advantages over SVM, known for its precision in high-dimensional spaces, and Random Forest, valued for its resilience against overfitting. The study emphasizes the importance of parameter optimization and feature engineering in maximizing the performance of spam detection models. This research contributes to the development of more reliable and scalable spam detection frameworks by addressing the diverse attributes of spam messages. The findings offer valuable insights for researchers and practitioners in cybersecurity, underscoring the transformative potential of XGBoost in combating the evolving threat of spam.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

McKinsey & Company. (2024). Cybersecurity and digital threats: Global trends and risks. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com

Ozkan-Okay, A., Yilmaz, E., & Akin, E. (2023). Rule-based and learning-based methods for spam detection: Challenges and future directions. Expert Systems with Applications, 222, 119-145.

Thakur, R., Joshi, R., Thakral, R., & Jain, A. (2022). Detection of spam emails using machine learning algorithms. Materials Today: Proceedings, 56, 409–415.

Awad, W. A., & Elseuofi, S. M. (2011). Machine learning methods for spam email classification. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, 9(9), 360–364.

Gangavarapu, S., et al. (2020). Spam detection using ensemble learning methods. Procedia Computer Science, 167, 2201–2210.

Tamilarasan, R., et al. (2023). Comparative analysis of classification algorithms in spam email detection. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 14(2), 123–130.

Gibson, D., et al. (2020). A comparative study of machine learning algorithms for spam detection. Journal of Information Security, 11(3), 131–140.

T. Chen and C. Guestrin, “XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system,” Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2016, pp. 785–794.

J. Brownlee, “A gentle introduction to XGBoost for applied machine learning,” Machine Learning Mastery, 2016.

Y. Goldberg, “Neural network methods for natural language processing,” Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–309, 2017.

N. V. Chawla et al., “SMOTE: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 16, pp. 321–357, 2002.

F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python,” Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011.

Downloads

Published

2026-01-31

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles