Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM63429
Volume:
10 |
5 |
May 2026
Pages:
1-5
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of Computer Engineering
Matoshri College of Engineering and Research Centre Nashik
Department of Computer Engineering
Matoshri College of Engineering and Research Centre Nashik
Department of Computer Engineering
Matoshri College of Engineering and Research Centre Nashik
Department of Computer Engineering
Matoshri College of Engineering and Research Centre Nashik
The rapid growth of digital payment systems has significantly increased the risk of credit card fraud, resulting in major financial losses for banks, businesses, and customers. Traditional fraud detection systems often fail to identify complex and evolving fraud patterns in real time. This research presents a comparative study of multiple machine learning algorithms for detecting fraudulent credit card transactions. The study evaluates Logistic Regression, Decision Tree, Random Forest, and XGBoost models using a publicly available transaction dataset. Data preprocessing techniques such as normalization, missing value handling, and class imbalance treatment are applied to improve model performance. The models are evaluated using accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score metrics. Experimental results show that ensemble learning methods outperform traditional classification models in fraud detection. This research helps identify the most efficient algorithm for real-time financial transaction monitoring.
KEYWORDS
In this research, a comparative analysis of multiple machine learning algorithms for credit card fraud detection was performed. The increasing use of digital payment systems has made fraud detection an important challenge in the financial sector. To address this issue, machine learning models including Logistic Regression, Decision Tree, Random Forest, and XGBoost were implemented and evaluated using a real-world credit card transaction dataset. The experimental results demonstrated that different algorithms show different performance levels in identifying fraudulent transactions. Among the evaluated models, ensemble learning algorithms such as Random Forest and XGBoost achieved better accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score compared to traditional classification models. These algorithms successfully identified fraudulent patterns while minimizing false predictions. This study concludes that machine learning can significantly improve fraud detection systems by providing faster, more accurate, and intelligent decision-making. The findings of this research can help financial institutions build secure real-time fraud monitoring systems and reduce financial losses caused by fraudulent activities
[1] A. Dal Pozzolo, O. Caelen, R. A. Johnson, and G. Bontempi, “Calibrating Probability with Undersampling for Unbalanced Classification,” IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence, 2015. [2] J. West and M. Bhattacharya, “Intelligent Financial Fraud Detection: A Comprehensive Review,” Computers & Security, 2016. [3] S. Bhattacharyya, S. Jha, K. Tharakunnel, and J. C. Westland, “Data Mining for Credit Card Fraud Detection,” Decision Support Systems, 2011. [4] T. Chen and C. Guestrin, “XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System,” ACM SIGKDD, 2016. [5] L. Breiman, “Random Forests,” Machine Learning Journal, 2001. [6] Kaggle, “Credit Card Fraud Detection Dataset.”
Publication Date
5/18/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
2
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...