automated detection of deception and intent l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Automated Detection of Deception and Intent PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Automated Detection of Deception and Intent

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 32

Automated Detection of Deception and Intent - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 319 Views
  • Uploaded on

Automated Detection of Deception and Intent. Judee Burgoon, Ed.D. Center for the Management of Information University of Arizona. 19MAR04. Collaborative Partners. DETECTING DECEPTION IN THE MILITARY INFOSPHERE. Funded by Department of Defense.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Automated Detection of Deception and Intent' - Mercy


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
automated detection of deception and intent

Automated Detection of Deception and Intent

Judee Burgoon, Ed.D.

Center for the Management of Information

University of Arizona

19MAR04

collaborative partners
Collaborative Partners

DETECTING DECEPTION IN THE MILITARY INFOSPHERE

Funded by Department of Defense

  • Center for the Management of Information, University of Arizona
  • Center for Computational Bioengineering, Imaging and Modeling, Rutgers University
  • Funded by Department of Homeland Security

AUTOMATED INTENT DETECTION

deception and intent defined
Deception and Intent Defined
  • Deception is a message knowingly transmitted with the intent to foster false beliefs or conclusions.
  • Hostile intent refers to plans to conduct criminal or terrorist activity
  • Intent is inferred from:
    • suspicious behavior
    • overt hostility
    • deception
many ways to deceive
Lies

Fabrications

Concealments

Omissions

Misdirection

Bluffs

Fakery

Mimicry

Tall tales

White lies

Deflections

Evasions

Equivocation

Exaggerations

Camouflage

Strategic ambiguity

Hoaxes

Charades

Imposters

Many Ways To Deceive
statement of the problem
Statement of the Problem
  • Humans have very poor ability to detect deceit and hostile intent.
    • True of experts as well as untrained individuals
    • Accuracy rates of 40-60%--about the same as flipping a coin
  • Reliance on new communication technologies--text, audio, video--may make us more vulnerable to deceit.
questions

Questions

Are there reliable indicators of:

deceit?

intent to engage in hostile actions?

Can detection be automated to augment human abilities?

Does mode of communication make a difference?

sample deception indicators
Sample Deception Indicators
  • Arousal
    • Higher pitch, faster tempo
  • Emotion
    • Absence of emotional language, false smiles
  • Cognitive effort
    • Delays in responding, nonfluent speech
  • Memory
    • Fewer details, briefer messages
  • Strategic communication
    • Controlled movement, increasing involvement
our experiments
Our Experiments

16 exper-iments,

2136 subjects,

in 2.5 years

typical experiment mock theft
Typical Experiment: Mock Theft
  • Task
    • half of participants steal wallet from classroom, other half are innocents
    • all are interviewed by trained and/or untrained interviewers
  • Mode of interaction
    • face-to-face, text, audio, video
  • Outcomes
    • accuracy in detecting truth and deception
    • judged credibility
    • coding of verbal and nonverbal behavior
sample results
Sample Results
  • Deceivers create longer messages under text than FtF.
implications

Implications

Text-based deception allows for planning, rehearsal, editing.

Deceivers can use text messages to their advantage.

questions16

Questions

Are there reliable text-based indicators of deceit or hostile intent?

Can these be automated to overcome deceivers’ advantages?

sample results from automated analysis
Sample Results from Automated Analysis
  • Deceivers use different language than truth tellers.
    • Deceivers—more
      • quantity
      • uncertainty
      • references to others
      • informality
    • Truthtellers—more
      • diversity
      • complexity
      • positive affect
      • references to self
automating analysis agent99 parser
Automating Analysis:Agent99 Parser
  • Find cues in text
  • Submit to data mining tool
decision tree analysis

Modifier Quantity: 51

Temporal Immediacy: 0.0

Sensory Ratio: 0.0325

Verb_Quantity: 63

Modifier Quantity: 0.0325

Modal Verb Ratio: 0.2698

True: it is deceptive

Decision Tree Analysis
accuracy in detecting deceit
Accuracy in Detecting Deceit

Note: Preliminary findings from Mock Theft, from transcribed face-to-face sessions

implications22

Implications

Linguistic and content features together can reliably identify deceptive or suspicious messages.

Text analysis can be successfully automated.

questions23

Questions

Can hostile intent be mapped to behavior?

Are there reliable video-based indicators of deceit and intent?

Are the indicators open to automation?

approach to analysis
Approach to Analysis
  • Four data sets:
    • Pre-polygraph interviews from actual investigations
    • Mock theft experiment
      • Two states: innocent (truthful), deceptive (guilty)
    • Actors in airport/screening location scenarios
      • Three states: relaxed, agitated (nervous), overcontrolled
    • Actors showing normal behavior to train neural networks
intent recognition from video
Intent Recognition from Video
  • Track and estimate human movement including:
    • Head
    • Facial & Head Features
    • Hands
    • Body
    • Legs
  • Tracking techniques:
    • Physics-based tracking of face and hands
    • Statistical model-based motion

estimation

sample results from human coders
Sample Results from Human Coders
  • “Thieves” use fewer head movements and gestures, more self-touching than “innocents.”
sample patterns actors
Sample Patterns: Actors

Head pos.

L. hand pos.

R. hand pos.

Head pos.

L. hand pos.

R. hand pos.

Head pos.

L. hand pos.

R. hand pos.

Head vel.

L. hand vel.

R. hand vel.

Head vel.

L. hand vel.

R. hand vel.

Head vel.

L. hand vel.

R. hand vel.

controlled

relaxed

nervous

sample patterns mock thieves

Head pos.

L. hand pos.

R. hand pos.

Head pos.

L. hand pos.

R. hand pos.

Head vel.

L. hand vel.

R. hand vel.

Head vel.

L. hand vel.

R. hand vel.

Sample Patterns: Mock Thieves

Nervous (lying)

Relaxed (not lying)

summary
Summary
  • Humans are fallible in detecting deception and hostile intent
  • Automated detection tools to augment human judgment can greatly increase detection accuracy
  • Verbal and nonverbal behaviors have been identified that:
    • Can be automated
    • Together significantly improve detection accuracy
  • More research under a variety of contexts will determine which indicators and systems are the most reliable