MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067774887 · doi:10.4018/jdwm.2010070103

Classification of Peer-to-Peer Traffic Using A Two-Stage Window-Based Classifier With Fast Decision Tree and IP Layer Attributes

2010· article· en· W2067774887 on OpenAlexaff
Bijan Raahemi, Ali Mumtaz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTraffic classificationClassifier (UML)RouterDecision treeData miningThe InternetPeer-to-peerInternet trafficArtificial intelligenceMachine learningComputer networkNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new approach using data mining techniques, and in particular a two-stage architecture, for classification of Peer-to-Peer (P2P) traffic in IP networks where in the first stage the traffic is filtered using standard port numbers and layer 4 port matching to label well-known P2P and NonP2P traffic. The labeled traffic produced in the first stage is used to train a Fast Decision Tree (FDT) classifier with high accuracy. The Unknown traffic is then applied to the FDT model which classifies the traffic into P2P and NonP2P with high accuracy. The two-stage architecture not only classifies well-known P2P applications, but also classifies applications that use random or non-standard port numbers and cannot be classified otherwise. The authors captured the internet traffic at a gateway router, performed pre-processing on the data, selected the most significant attributes, and prepared a training data set to which the new algorithm was applied. Finally, the authors built several models using a combination of various attribute sets for different ratios of P2P to NonP2P traffic in the training data.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data Warehousing and MiningSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207