site / sub-source in AdMavenValidVisit flags the bad sub_source_id (site / widget); add it to AdMaven's campaign block list.
AdMaven runs a large pop, push and interstitial network sourced heavily from direct publishers, with reach that spans tier-1 markets down through long-tail regional inventory. Its key advantage for invalid-traffic control is granularity: on top of a {source_id} for the traffic source and a {click_id} that ties a session to your record, AdMaven exposes a {sub_source_id} — the specific site, widget or publisher behind each click. That is exactly the unit you can add to a campaign block list, so attribution at that level turns a vague "this campaign underperforms" into "these three sub-sources are the problem." ValidVisit captures those tokens as each click lands, then weighs the click against 100+ independent data points — the network it travelled through, the device on the other end and how the visitor actually behaves — and folds them into one 0–100 quality score, so real people clear it and automated traffic stands apart. The verdict is reported back per sub_source_id.
https://yoursite.com/landing?utm_source=admaven&utm_medium=pop&vv_campaign_id={:campaign_id}&vv_source={source_id}&vv_publisher_id={sub_source_id}&vv_click_id={click_id}Pop and push inventory has a structurally different IVT profile from intent formats, because the ad fires on page entry/exit or from a notification rather than a deliberate, considered click. On AdMaven the patterns ValidVisit surfaces cluster by sub-source. The most common is automated pop-loaders: scripts that trigger pop events at scale from server farms and proxied connections, concentrated in a handful of {sub_source_id} values rather than spread organically — a supply-side injection signature, not normal audience variation.
A second pattern is subscriber-list quality on the push side: a push feed built from incentivised or bot-inflated opt-ins clicks in unnaturally regular bursts aligned to send windows, and the way ValidVisit reads timing and environment together separates it from a genuine subscriber. A third is automation that hides behind a normal-looking browser — HTTP clients and modified browser builds that present a plausible user-agent but behave nothing like a real person once the full picture of the click is scored, a gap that persists even when the surface details look right. Because every signal feeds a score tied to a {sub_source_id}, a single bad site or widget can be isolated from the rest of a campaign that is performing.
Rank your active {sub_source_id} values by average quality score and by the share of clicks in the suspicious/bad tier. Sub-sources running well above your campaign baseline are block-list candidates before you scale into them.
Automated pop traffic arriving through cloud hosting or proxied connections concentrates in specific sites/widgets. ValidVisit ties that finding back to the {sub_source_id} so you exclude the offending sub-source without touching ones delivering real users.
On the push side, unnaturally even click bursts aligned to notification schedules point to bot-inflated subscriber lists. The timing dimension of the score flags the sources where that pattern concentrates.
When a sub-source shows a high share of clicks scoring as automated rather than human, it points to loaders and scripted browsers instead of real people — a read drawn from the full click picture, which is far harder to spoof than a user-agent string.
Each AdMaven macro maps to a normalized parameter, so every scored click is pinned to the right campaign, creative and publisher.
| Token | AdMaven macro | Maps to | Identifies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Campaign ID | {:campaign_id} | campaign_id | campaign |
| Source ID | {source_id} | source | source |
| Sub-source / Site ID | {sub_source_id} | publisher_id | publisher |
| Click ID | {click_id} | click_id | click |
{:campaign_id}{source_id}{sub_source_id}{click_id}AdMavenitself isn’t the problem — bots and invalid traffic concentrate in a handful of its sub-sources: the publisher, site or zone, and the placement or widget within it. So we roll the score up by those AdMaven tokens, not by creative (which says nothing about whether a click was human).
Illustrative example — AdMaven traffic scored 0–100 per sub-source, worst first.
See your own AdMaven sub-sources scored this way.
Bot / invalid-traffic score broken down by:
{sub_source_id}Sub-level source segmentation (site / widget / publisher) — the unit you add to the campaign block list.Per-click id: AdMaven passes a unique click id, so we also run velocity, deduplication and repeat-source checks on every click.
Compare bot & invalid-traffic breakdown across every ad network →Every click is weighed against more than a hundred independent data points and reduced to a single, sortable 0–100 quality score.
Each data point is combined rather than checked in isolation, so a genuine human almost never trips enough of them to be flagged — and bots that beat one rarely beat the rest.
The detection model is ours and stays that way. What you get is a clear verdict on every click — not a single brittle rule you can game, and not an unexplained number you can't act on.
Every verdict maps to the campaign, publisher and placement that sent the click — so you know exactly which source to cut.
Place ValidVisit's script on your landing page and append AdMaven's macros — {source_id}, {sub_source_id}, {campaign} and {click_id} — as URL parameters on your destination URL. The pixel captures them when the visitor arrives, scores the click, and stores the verdict tied to each {click_id}, giving you a per-click audit trail segmented by sub-source. Scoring happens after the click lands, so there is nothing on the pop/push event.
Yes — that is the primary output. Because {sub_source_id} is captured on every click, ValidVisit ranks your sites/widgets by quality distribution and by what is dragging the scores down (cloud hosting, proxied connections, scripted clients, mismatched behaviour). You take that list and add the offenders to your AdMaven campaign block list. ValidVisit reports; the exclusion is applied in your AdMaven account.
No. AdMaven applies its own filtering, but that is the network grading its own inventory. ValidVisit is an independent second measurement scored on your traffic, so you can exclude sub-sources that pass the network filter yet still underperform for you — and you keep the evidence.
See which campaigns and publishers send real, converting traffic vs bots — every click scored 0–100.
Free trial at launch · lock in early-access pricing
One script · raw IP never stored · GDPR legitimate-interest basis