Integration of mobility and intrusion detection for wireless<i>ad hoc</i>networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract One of the main challenges in building intrusion detection systems (IDSs) for mobilead hocnetworks (MANETs) is to integrate mobility impacts and to adjust the behaviour of IDSs correspondingly. In this paper, we first introduce two different approaches, a Markov chain‐based approach and a Hotelling'sT2test based approach, to construct local IDSs for MANETs. We then demonstrate that nodes' moving speed, a commonly used parameter in tuning IDS performances, is not an effective metric to tune IDS performances under different mobility models. To solve this problem, we further propose anadaptivescheme, in which suitable normal profiles and corresponding proper thresholds can be selectedadaptivelyby each local IDS through periodically measuring its locallink change rate, a proposed unified performance metric. We study the proposed adaptive mechanism at different mobility levels, using different mobility models such as random waypoint model, random drunken model, and obstacle mobility model. Simulation results show that our proposed adaptive scheme is less dependent on the underlying mobility models and can further reduce false positive ratio. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".