Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Learning from financial transaction graphs requires both recency sensitivity and retention of sparse, long-range behavioral evidence. We study a fraud-preserving adaptive augmentation (FPAA) mechanism in a dual-horizon heterogeneous graph encoder. Each transaction receives strictly earlier user-, merchant-, and device-linked messages, with a recent exponential-decay path and a long-memory path. Training combines focal classification, TH-GCL-style structurally and temporally perturbed positive pairs, and class-conditioned edge survival applied only to observed training labels. On a fully synthetic, reproducible 30,000-event stream (2.40% fraud; chronological 60/20/20 split), the proposed dual-horizon FPAA model achieves average precision 0.427 ± 0.038 across three training seeds, versus 0.421 ± 0.032 for uniform perturbations and 0.441 ± 0.032 for the dual-horizon supervised encoder. The short-memory-only supervised encoder achieves 0.368, indicating that retaining long-range history is consequential in this benchmark. A logged view-survival audit confirms that FPAA preserves 96.0% of fraud-linked training edges under structural augmentation, compared with 71.2% for uniform dropout. Across three independently generated synthetic streams with the same simulator design, FPAA mean AP is 0.423, against 0.417 for ordinary contrastive augmentation; a causally history-enriched LightGBM reaches 0.502. Hence, protecting fraud edges changes view integrity but provides a modest predictive gain, and historical information alone explains much of the initially observed graph advantage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: