High accuracy android malware detection using ensemble learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With over 50 billion downloads and more than 1.3 million apps in Google's official market, Android has continued to gain popularity among smartphone users worldwide. At the same time there has been a rise in malware targeting the platform, with more recent strains employing highly sophisticated detection avoidance techniques. As traditional signature‐based methods become less potent in detecting unknown malware, alternatives are needed for timely zero‐day discovery. Thus, this study proposes an approach that utilises ensemble learning for Android malware detection. It combines advantages of static analysis with the efficiency and performance of ensemble machine learning to improve Android malware detection accuracy. The machine learning models are built using a large repository of malware samples and benign apps from a leading antivirus vendor. Experimental results and analysis presented shows that the proposed method which uses a large feature space to leverage the power of ensemble learning is capable of 97.3–99% detection accuracy with very low false positive rates.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it