A comparative study of DistilBERT and Perceiver for deceptive review detection in hospitality review data.

IF 3.8 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Frontiers in Big Data Pub Date : 2026-09-09 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fdata.2026.1918383
Ioana Ximena Remeş, Felicia Mirabela Costea, Cornelia Aurora Gyorödi
{"title":"A comparative study of DistilBERT and Perceiver for deceptive review detection in hospitality review data.","authors":"Ioana Ximena Remeş, Felicia Mirabela Costea, Cornelia Aurora Gyorödi","doi":"10.3389/fdata.2026.1918383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Deceptive reviews on hospitality platforms can undermine consumer trust and affect the reliability of online reputation systems. This study presents a comparative empirical evaluation of two deep learning pipelines for deceptive review detection: a DistilBERT-based pipeline fine-tuned end-to-end on review text and complemented with rating and sentiment features, and a Perceiver-based pipeline operating on fixed sentence embeddings generated by a frozen encoder. The experiments were conducted on a combined English-language corpus of 3,322 hotel reviews assembled from the Myleott benchmark corpus and a Kaggle dataset of authentic Ritz-Carlton New York reviews, comprising approximately 2,520 genuine and 800 deceptive reviews. The corpus was evaluated using stratified 80/20 train-test splits, with 2,657 reviews used for training and 665 for testing in each split, and the deep learning models were trained for 10 epochs. To assess the robustness of the findings, the evaluation was repeated across three independent random seeds and compared with majority-class and TF-IDF plus logistic regression baselines. DistilBERT achieved the most stable performance, reaching an average accuracy of 0.9348 ± 0.0014, an F1-score of 0.9569 ± 0.0013, and a Matthews correlation coefficient of 0.8240 ± 0.0012. In contrast, the original Perceiver pipeline showed a strong tendency to collapse toward the majority class, which limited its ability to identify deceptive reviews despite apparently high recall. Although class-weighted training improved Perceiver's behavior, its results remained less reliable and more variable than those obtained with DistilBERT. The balanced TF-IDF plus logistic regression baseline performed close to DistilBERT, indicating that well-configured traditional natural language processing methods remain competitive on datasets of this size. The ablation analysis further indicates that the rating and sentiment features contribute primarily to the stability of the model across different train-test splits, rather than providing a substantial independent gain in discriminative performance. The results indicate that the fine-tuned DistilBERT pipeline provides the most robust option in the evaluated setting, while also emphasizing the importance of reporting corpus composition, test-set size, class imbalance, and imbalance-aware metrics when developing deceptive review detection systems for hospitality review data.</p>","PeriodicalId":52859,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Big Data","volume":"9 ","pages":"1918383"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13597425/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Big Data","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2026.1918383","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Deceptive reviews on hospitality platforms can undermine consumer trust and affect the reliability of online reputation systems. This study presents a comparative empirical evaluation of two deep learning pipelines for deceptive review detection: a DistilBERT-based pipeline fine-tuned end-to-end on review text and complemented with rating and sentiment features, and a Perceiver-based pipeline operating on fixed sentence embeddings generated by a frozen encoder. The experiments were conducted on a combined English-language corpus of 3,322 hotel reviews assembled from the Myleott benchmark corpus and a Kaggle dataset of authentic Ritz-Carlton New York reviews, comprising approximately 2,520 genuine and 800 deceptive reviews. The corpus was evaluated using stratified 80/20 train-test splits, with 2,657 reviews used for training and 665 for testing in each split, and the deep learning models were trained for 10 epochs. To assess the robustness of the findings, the evaluation was repeated across three independent random seeds and compared with majority-class and TF-IDF plus logistic regression baselines. DistilBERT achieved the most stable performance, reaching an average accuracy of 0.9348 ± 0.0014, an F1-score of 0.9569 ± 0.0013, and a Matthews correlation coefficient of 0.8240 ± 0.0012. In contrast, the original Perceiver pipeline showed a strong tendency to collapse toward the majority class, which limited its ability to identify deceptive reviews despite apparently high recall. Although class-weighted training improved Perceiver's behavior, its results remained less reliable and more variable than those obtained with DistilBERT. The balanced TF-IDF plus logistic regression baseline performed close to DistilBERT, indicating that well-configured traditional natural language processing methods remain competitive on datasets of this size. The ablation analysis further indicates that the rating and sentiment features contribute primarily to the stability of the model across different train-test splits, rather than providing a substantial independent gain in discriminative performance. The results indicate that the fine-tuned DistilBERT pipeline provides the most robust option in the evaluated setting, while also emphasizing the importance of reporting corpus composition, test-set size, class imbalance, and imbalance-aware metrics when developing deceptive review detection systems for hospitality review data.

蒸馏器和感知器在酒店评论数据中欺骗性评论检测的比较研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.20%
发文量
122
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书