MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W103353880

Automatic Enforcement of Security in Computer Networks

2007· article· en· W103353880 on OpenAlexaff
T. Mechri, Mahjoub Langar, Mohamed Mejri, Hamido Fujita, Yutaka Funyu

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Trends in Software Methodologies, Tools and Techniques · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess calculusSecurity policyEquivalence (formal languages)Network security policyEnforcementNetwork securityComputer security modelProcess (computing)Computer securityNetwork Access ControlOperator (biology)Theoretical computer scienceSecurity serviceInformation securityProgramming languageCloud computing securityMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsOperating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main issue of this paper is to propose a formal technique allowing to automatically configure a given network so that it will respect a given security policy. In other words, given a computer network N and a security policy Φ, we introduce a formal technique that automatically produce another network N' such that N' $\vDash$ Φ and N and N' behaves in an equivalent (with respect to a given de finition of equivalence) way. To that end, we define a new process algebra allowing to better specify and analyze monitored network. We also define an operator $\otimes$ that produce from an initial network N and a security policy Φ another version of the network, denoted by N $\otimes$ Φ, configured in such a way that the security policy is always respected.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Trends in Software Methodologies, Tools and TechniquesSame topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207