MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1491866120

A boosting genetic fuzzy classifier for intrusion detection using data mining techniques for rule pre-screening

2003· article· en· W1491866120 on OpenAlexaff
Tansel Özyer, Reda Alhajj, Ken Barker

Bibliographic record

VenueHybrid Intelligent Systems · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy ruleData miningBoosting (machine learning)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceFuzzy logicAssociation rule learningMachine learningClassifier (UML)Intrusion detection systemFuzzy classificationFuzzy setPattern recognition (psychology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the work described in this paper is to provide an intelligent intruion detection system (IIDS) that uses data mining techniques, namely classificatian and association rules mining for predicting different behaviours in networked computers. To achieve this, we propose a method based on iterative rule learning using a fuzzy rule based genetic classifier. Our approach involves two stages. First, a large number of candidate rules are generated for each class using fuzzy association rules mining and pre-screened using two rule evaluation criteria in order to reduce the fuzzy rule search space. Candidate rides, obtained after pre-screening, are used in genetic fuzzy classifier to generate rules for the classes specified in IIDS, namely Normal, PRB-probe, DOS-denial of service, U2R-user to root mad R2L- remote to local. During the second stage, boosting genetic algorithm is employed respectively for each class to find its fuzzy rules required to classify data; each time a fuzzy rule is extracted and included in the system. The boosting mechanism evaluates the weight of each data item to help the rule extraction mechanism focus more on data having relatively more weight, i.e., uucovered less by the rules extracted until the current iteration. Each extracted fuzzy rule is assigned a weight. Weighted fuzzy rules in each class are aggregated to find the vote of each class label for each data item. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHybrid Intelligent SystemsSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207