I started with signals I could actually defend: review velocity spikes, account age, reviewer history, linguistic patterns.
Start by clarifying the goal: reduce fake reviews to maintain trust and platform integrity. Then outline a system that combines detection (using signals and models), enforcement (actions on fake reviews), and continuous improvement (feedback loops). Emphasize trade-offs between false positives and false negatives, and how you'd measure success.
Pro tip: Frame the solution as a trust and safety system, not just a classifier. Show you understand adversarial dynamics: fraudsters adapt, so the system must evolve. Also, consider the reviewer and business perspectives to avoid unintended consequences.
Define what 'fake' means (e.g., incentivized, malicious, bot-generated) and the primary objective (e.g., reduce prevalence, minimize user impact). Identify constraints like scalability, latency, and fairness.
List potential signals: review content (language, sentiment), reviewer behavior (frequency, burstiness), business patterns (sudden spikes), and network connections (IP, device). Consider both supervised and unsupervised approaches.
Propose a multi-layered system: rule-based filters for obvious cases, ML models for nuanced detection, and human review for edge cases. Define enforcement actions: removal, downranking, warning, or account suspension.
Choose metrics: precision/recall, false positive rate, prevalence of fake reviews over time, and impact on user trust (e.g., via surveys). Set up A/B tests to measure effectiveness and unintended consequences.
Establish feedback loops: user reports, model retraining, and adversarial testing. Monitor for drift and new fraud patterns. Consider transparency and appeals process.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.