Papers › Exploring Neural Joint Activity in Spiking Neural Networks for Fraud Detection
Exploring Neural Joint Activity in Spiking Neural Networks for Fraud Detection
Dylan Perdigão, Francisco Antunes, Catarina Silva, Bernardete Ribeiro
Spiking Neural Networks (SNNs), inspired by the real brain’s behavior, offer an energy-efficient alternative to traditional artificial neural networks coupled with their neural joint activity, also referred to as population coding. This population coding is replicated in SNNs by attributing more than one neuron to each class in the output layer. This study leverages SNNs for fraud detection through real-world datasets, namely the Bank Account Fraud dataset suite, addressing the fairness and bias issues inherent in conventional machine learning algorithms. Different configurations of time steps and population sizes were compared within a 1D-Convolutional Spiking Neural Network, whose hyperparameters were optimized through a Bayesian optimization process. Our proposed SNN approach with neural joint activity enables the classification of fraudulent opening of bank accounts more accurately and fairly than standard SNNs. The results highlight the potential of SNNs to surpass non-population coding baselines by achieving an average of 47.08% of recall at a business constraint of 5% of false positive rate, offering a robust solution for fraud detection. Moreover, the proposed approach attains comparable results to gradient-boosting machine models while maintaining predictive equality towards sensitive attributes above 90%.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fairness | BAF – Base | 1D-CSNN | Predictive Equality (age) | 97.80% | #2 of 2 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fairness | BAF – Variant I | 1D-CSNN | Predictive Equality (age) | 96.87% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fairness | BAF – Variant II | 1D-CSNN | Predictive Equality (age) | 98.97% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fairness | BAF – Variant III | 1D-CSNN | Predictive Equality (age) | 98.45% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fairness | BAF – Variant IV | 1D-CSNN | Predictive Equality (age) | 98.68% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fairness | BAF – Variant V | 1D-CSNN | Predictive Equality (age) | 99.31% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fraud Detection | BAF – Base | LightGBM | Recall @ 5% FPR | 51.76% | #9 of 12 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fraud Detection | BAF – Base | 1D-CSNN | Recall @ 5% FPR | 42.79% | #12 of 12 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fraud Detection | BAF – Variant I | 1D-CSNN | Recall @ 5% FPR | 40.71% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fraud Detection | BAF – Variant II | 1D-CSNN | Recall @ 5% FPR | 47.08% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fraud Detection | BAF – Variant III | 1D-CSNN | Recall @ 5% FPR | 41.83% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fraud Detection | BAF – Variant IV | 1D-CSNN | Recall @ 5% FPR | 35.54% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Fraud Detection | BAF – Variant V | 1D-CSNN | Recall @ 5% FPR | 34.96% | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections