Gaming Fraud Detection via Input Threshold Validation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current technologies fail to effectively detect and counteract player fraud and collusion in gaming environments, particularly in large venue scenarios and remote player setups, where digital inputs and unauthorized activities can go undetected.

Innovation Solution

A system that monitors user inputs during application execution, establishes behavioral models through simulation, and uses validation and counter-measures modules to identify and respond to suspicious activities, including cheating, collusion, and unauthorized assistance, by comparing user inputs against thresholds and employing machine learning for enhanced accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If traditional proctoring methods are used in large venue scenarios, then the system is simple to operate, but it fails to detect digital inputs and cheating activities

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the detection process into multiple independent modules: input monitoring module, behavioral analysis module, validation module, and counter-measures module. Each module handles specific aspects of fraud detection, allowing complex detection capabilities to be built from simpler, manageable components that can operate in parallel.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces intermediary components such as the validation module that acts as a mediator between user inputs and the game execution. This validation layer intercepts and analyzes inputs before they affect game state, enabling detection without requiring complete system redesign.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If remote player scenarios are monitored with basic methods, then the implementation is simple, but unauthorized activities and impersonation go undetected

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveintegrity of gaming environmentVSAvoidautomation level
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSExtent of automation

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements continuous feedback loops where user behaviors are monitored, analyzed against established models, and used to dynamically adjust detection thresholds. The validation module receives feedback from behavioral analysis and automatically responds by validating or rejecting inputs, creating an automated reliability enhancement system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes detection parameters dynamically based on learned behavioral patterns. Thresholds for suspicious activity detection are adjusted based on machine learning models that adapt to normal player behaviors, allowing the system to maintain high reliability while automating the detection process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If machine learning models are trained extensively to detect all fraud types, then detection accuracy improves, but processing time and computational resources increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefraud detection accuracyVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by pre-training machine learning models offline to establish behavioral baselines and detection thresholds before actual game execution. During live gameplay, the pre-trained models quickly evaluate inputs against established patterns, significantly reducing real-time processing requirements while maintaining high detection accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial validation by focusing computational resources on detecting specific high-risk fraud types rather than analyzing every possible input in equal detail. The validation module selectively applies different levels of scrutiny based on the nature of the input and detected risk patterns, optimizing the balance between accuracy and processing speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS11532207B2Method to detect and counteract suspicious activity in an application environment
Publication Date: 2022.12.20 AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY I L P
  • US11532207B2 patent drawing
  • US11532207B2 patent drawing
  • US11532207B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Aspects of the subject disclosure may include, for example, comparing an input received from a peripheral device associated with an execution of a gaming application with a threshold value, wherein the threshold value is based on a first identification of a first user, a second identification of the peripheral device, and a third identification of stimuli presented as part of the execution of the gaming application. Responsive to the comparing, a determination may be made that the input exceeds the threshold value. Responsive to the determination, a validation request may be transmitted to a user device of the first user. Other embodiments are disclosed.